Contents:HighlightsSummaryGaming PerformanceBenchmark PerformanceTechnical SpecsRelated ComparisonsRelated GPUs
Performance
Quadro K2000M
1,7982% of 104,598
Arc A7501,974% better
37,28836% of 104,598
The Arc A750 has 1,974% better performance than the Quadro K2000M for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
Performance per dollar
Quadro K2000M
No data available
Arc A750
129.0280% of 161.45
The Arc A750 has 80% of the performance per dollar compared to the leader for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark: AMD Radeon RX 7600.
Shop Quadro K2000M
Shop Arc A750
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Summary
#
About the NVIDIA Quadro K2000M GPU
The NVIDIA Quadro K2000M is an end-of-life mobile graphics card that released in Q2 2012. It is built on the Kepler GPU microarchitecture (codename GK107) and is manufactured on a 28 nm process.
Memory
The K2000M has 2 GB of DDR3 memory, with a 900 MHz memory clock and a 128 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 28.8 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.
Cores and Clock Speeds
The K2000M includes 384 CUDA cores, the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 745 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 745 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 32 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 16 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.
Compatibility & Power Consumption
The GPU has a thermal design power (TDP) of 55 W. A power supply not strong enough to handle this might result in system crashes and potentially damage your hardware.
Benchmark Performance
The K2000M has the 376th best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 1.72% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.
About the Intel Arc A750 GPU
The Intel Arc A750 is a desktop graphics card that launched in Q4 2022 with a MSRP of $289. It is built on the Generation 12.7 GPU microarchitecture (codename DG2-512) and is manufactured on a 6 nm process.
Memory
The Arc A750 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, with a 2,000 MHz memory clock and a 256 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 512 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.
Cores and Clock Speeds
The Arc A750 includes 3,584 shading units, the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 2,050 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 2,400 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 224 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 112 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing. Additionally, the GPU features 448 Xe Matrix Extensions (XMX) optimized for AI workloads and 28 ray tracing units dedicated to real-time ray tracing calculations.
Compatibility & Power Consumption
The Arc A750 occupies 2 PCIe expansion slots. It supports HDMI 2.1, DisplayPort 2.0 display connections. Intel recommends a power supply of at least 550 W to handle the GPU's thermal design power (TDP) of 225 W.
Benchmark Performance & Value
The Arc A750 has the 49th best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 35.65% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090. Its 37,288 score and $289 launch price (MSRP) gives it a performance per dollar of 129.02. This is the 3rd best in value for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
General Info
General overview of the GPU, including details like its manufacturer, release date, launch price, and current production status.
| Info | Quadro K2000M | Arc A750 |
|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | NVIDIA | Intel |
| Architecture | Kepler | Generation 12.7 |
| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |
| Release Date | Q2 2012 | Q4 2022 |
| Launch Price (MSRP) | -- | $289 |
| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |
| Shop | Check Price | Check Price |
Gaming Performance
#
Select a game to compare FPS metrics
F1 24
Senua's Saga Hellblade 2
Ghost of Tsushima
Dragon's Dogma 2
Horizon Forbidden West
Alone in the Dark (2024)
Sons of the Forest
FPS Benchmarks
This table showcases the average frame rate (FPS) achieved both GPUs in at various resolutions. Frame rate is a crucial indicator of how smoothly the GPU can run the game. A higher FPS generally translates to a smoother gameplay experience.
- Frames Per Second
F1 24 | Quadro K2000M | Arc A750 |
|---|---|---|
| Low - 1080p | -- | 265 FPS |
| Medium - 1080p | -- | 224 FPS |
| High - 1080p | -- | 169 FPS |
| Ultra - 1080p | -- | 57 FPS |
| QHD - 1440p | -- | 37 FPS |
| 4K UHD - 2160p | -- | 17 FPS |
FPS Source: Notebookcheck
Compare Frames Per Second (FPS)
The average frame rate (FPS) in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, higher FPS results in a smoother gameplay experience.
Choose Baseline GPU:Quadro K2000M orArc A750
| GPU | Frames Per Second | |
|---|---|---|
| GeForce RTX 3070 Ti | 28.2 | +68% |
| GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | 22.2 | +32% |
| Arc A770 | 21.2 | +26% |
| Radeon RX 6800 | 20.6 | +23% |
| GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER | 17 | +1% |
| Arc A750 | 16.8 | |
| GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER | 13.9 | -17% |
| Radeon RX 6600 | 9.5 | -43% |
Compare Cost Per Frame
The average cost per frame in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. Generally, a lower cost per frame implies better value for your money.
Choose Baseline GPU:Quadro K2000M orArc A750
| GPU | Cost Per Frame | |
|---|---|---|
| Radeon RX 5700 | 8.35 | -51% |
| Arc A770 | 15.52 | -10% |
| Arc A750 | 17.2 | |
| GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | 17.97 | +4% |
| GeForce RTX 3070 Ti | 21.24 | +23% |
| Radeon RX 6800 | 28.11 | +63% |
| GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER | 28.71 | +67% |
| GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER | 29.35 | +71% |
| Radeon RX 6600 | 34.63 | +101% |
Benchmark Performance
#
Performance
Quadro K2000M
1,7982% of 104,598
Arc A7501,974% better
37,28836% of 104,598
The Arc A750 has 1,974% better performance than the Quadro K2000M for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
The Quadro K2000M is ranked 376th with a score of 1,798, and the Arc A750 is ranked 49th with a score of 37,288.
Performance per dollar
Quadro K2000M
No data available
Arc A750
129.0280% of 161.45
The Arc A750 has 197% of the performance per dollar compared to the leader for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.
Arc A750's 129.02 performance per dollar ranks it 0th among the other benchmarked GPUs in our database.
Relative Performance
The average score in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
Choose Baseline GPU:Quadro K2000M or
| GPU | Benchmark Performance | |
|---|---|---|
| Radeon VII | 37,881 | +2,007% |
| GeForce GTX 1080 Ti | 37,671.5 | +1,995% |
| Arc A750 | 37,288 | +1,974% |
| TITAN X (Pascal) | 35,995 | +1,902% |
| Radeon RX 5700 XT | 35,822.5 | +1,892% |
| Quadro K1100M | 1,826.5 | +2% |
| GeForce GTX 560M | 1,820 | +1% |
| Quadro K2000M | 1,798 | |
| Radeon R5 M335 | 1,784 | -1% |
| Radeon R5 M255 | 1,784 | -1% |
Relative Value For Money
The average performance per dollar in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. A higher score implies a better value for your money.
Choose Baseline GPU:Quadro K2000M orArc A750
| GPU | Performance Per Dollar | |
|---|---|---|
| Radeon RX 7600 | 161.45 | +25% |
| Arc A750 | 129.02 | |
| GeForce RTX 4060 | 127.73 | -1% |
| Radeon RX 7700 XT | 127.71 | -1% |
| Arc A770 | 125.54 | -3% |
| GeForce RTX 4060 Ti (8 GB) | 119.81 | -7% |
| Radeon RX 5500 XT | 115.38 | -11% |
| Radeon RX 6500 XT | 115.35 | -11% |
| GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER | 114.62 | -11% |
| GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER | 114.15 | -12% |
Benchmark Scores
This table showcases the average performance scores achieved by both GPUs across industry-standard benchmark tests. These scores provide a valuable insight into overall performance. Powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
- Popular
| Benchmark | Quadro K2000M | Arc A750 |
|---|---|---|
| 3DMark Time Spy Graphics | -- | 12,386 |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | -- | 12,671 |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics | 8,766 | 130,715 (+1,391.16%) |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics | 1,046 | 29,667 (+2,736.23%) |
| 3DMark Night Raid Graphics | -- | 122,540 |
| 3DMark 11 Performance Score | 1,995 | 33,184 (+1,563.36%) |
| PassMark G3D Mark | 1,012 | 11,930 (+1,078.85%) |
| PassMark G2D Mark | 260 | 671 (+158.08%) |
| Unigine Heaven 3.0 DirectX 11 | 17 | -- |
| Unigine Heaven 3.0 OpenGL | 17.1 | -- |
Benchmarks Source: Notebookcheck
Technical Specs
#
Graphics Processor
General information about the graphics processing unit like their architecture, manufacturing process size, and transistor count. Newer GPU architectures generally bring efficiency improvements and may introduce technologies that enhance graphical capabilities.
| Spec | Quadro K2000M | Arc A750 |
|---|---|---|
| Codename | GK107 | DG2-512 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Generation 12.7 |
| Process Size | 28 nm | 6 nm |
| Transistors | 1,270 million | 21,700 million |
Memory Details
Memory specifications like their capacity, bandwidth, and clock speeds. GPU memory stores graphics data like frames, textures, and shadows which helps display rendered images. These specs are crucial for graphics-intense applications like gaming and 3D modeling.
| Spec | Quadro K2000M | Arc A750 |
|---|---|---|
| Memory Size | 2 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 28.8 Gb/s | 512 Gb/s |
| Memory Clock | 900 MHz | 2,000 MHz |
| Memory Interface | 128 bit | 256 bit |
| L1 Cache | 16 KB | -- |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 16 MB |
Board Compatibility
Compatibility information like their slot size, bus interface, power consumption, and display support. These specs are useful for verifying compatibility with your motherboard, power supply, and monitor.
| Spec | Quadro K2000M | Arc A750 |
|---|---|---|
| Slots | -- | 2 slots |
| Bus Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 W | 225 W |
| Suggested PSU | -- | 550 W |
| Power Connectors | -- | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| Outputs | Device Dependent | HDMI 2.1, DisplayPort 2.0 |
Cores & Clock Speeds
Processing power information like its cores and clock speed. These specs impact how fast they can process graphics. Each type of core or component serves a specific computational purpose.
| Spec | Quadro K2000M | Arc A750 |
|---|---|---|
| Shading Units | -- | 3,584 |
| CUDA Cores | 384 | -- |
| Execution Units (EU) | -- | 3,584 |
| Stream Multiprocessors (SM) | 2 | -- |
| Texture Mapping Units (TMU) | 32 | 224 |
| Render Output Units (ROP) | 16 | 112 |
| Xe Matrix Extensions (XMX) | -- | 448 |
| Ray Tracing Units (RTU) | -- | 28 |
| Core Clock Speed | 745 MHz | 2,050 MHz |
| Core Clock Speed (Boost) | 745 MHz | 2,400 MHz |
Theoretical Performance
Theoretical performance numbers derived from the raw specifications of the different components like core count and clock speeds. While these provide a glimpse into peak processing power, they do not represent real-world performance.
| Spec | Quadro K2000M | Arc A750 |
|---|---|---|
| Pixel Fill Rate | 5.96 GPixel/s | 268.8 GPixel/s |
| Texture Fill Rate | 23.84 GTexel/s | 537.6 GTexel/s |
| FP32 Performance | 572.2 GFLOPS | 17.2 TFLOPS |
| FP64 Performance | 23.84 GFLOPS | -- |
API Support
Graphics API versions supported by these graphics cards. APIs evolve over time, introducing new features and functionalities. Older GPUs may not support recent versions.
| Spec | Quadro K2000M | Arc A750 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 (5.1) | 6.6 |
Check out these comparisons for similar GPUs:
Looking for alternatives? Check out these similar GPUs:
* Performance rating, performance per dollar, and rankings are based on the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark and MSRP.