GPU Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics scores 5,183, which is 24.2% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D’s 3,930.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics compare to the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D in average benchmark score?

A: The AMD part has an average benchmark score of 3,883, while the NVIDIA card averages 3,930. Despite the AMD GPU winning the OpenCL test, its average is 1.2% lower than the Quadro 2000D’s average.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The Quadro 2000D uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 41.60 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R5 Graphics uses System Shared memory, with bandwidth listed as System Dependent.

Q: What are the process nodes for these two chips?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D is built on a 40 nm TSMC process, while the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics uses a 28 nm GlobalFoundries process.

Q: Does either GPU support Vulkan?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics supports Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D has no Vulkan support listed.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two cards?

A: The Quadro 2000D is rated at 62 W, whereas the Radeon R5 Graphics is rated at 15 W.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D is based on the GF106 chip using the Fermi architecture, manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It contains 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 4.9M per mm². The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics uses the Spectre SL chip with the GCN 2.0 architecture (Kaveri IGP), built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 2,410 million transistors into a 245 mm² die, giving a density of 9.8M per mm².

The shader configurations differ notably. The Quadro 2000D has 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Radeon R5 Graphics has 256 shading units, but only 16 TMUs and 4 ROPs. This imbalance means the AMD part has more raw shader throughput potential but far fewer texture and pixel processing units.

Memory architecture splits them sharply. The Quadro 2000D has dedicated 1024 MB GDDR5 on a 128-bit interface, running at 650 MHz (2.6 Gbps effective), producing 41.60 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R5 Graphics uses System Shared memory with no fixed bus width or bandwidth figure, it is System Dependent.

The NVIDIA part is a discrete single-slot card with 2x DVI outputs and a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface. The AMD part is an IGP with motherboard-dependent display outputs and no dedicated power connectors. The Quadro 2000D requires a 250 W suggested PSU, while the Radeon R5 Graphics has no such requirement listed.

API support also separates them. The Quadro 2000D supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but no Vulkan. The Radeon R5 Graphics supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics scores 5,183, while the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D scores 3,930. The delta is -24.2% from AMD’s perspective, meaning the Radeon outperforms the Quadro by 24.2%. This is the single decisive win for the AMD part.

Context from nearest rivals helps interpret the Quadro 2000D’s score. The Quadro 2000D sits within 0.3% of the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D (3,919), 0.6% below the GeForce GT 745M (3,953), 0.7% below the Radeon R5 M420 (3,956), and 0.7% below the GeForce 830M (3,957). Essentially, the Quadro 2000D is clustered tightly with other mid-range parts from its era, none of which approach the Radeon R5 Graphics’ OpenCL result.

For the Radeon R5 Graphics, its nearest rivals include the Quadro 2000D itself (3,930, delta -1.2%), the Quadro 2000 (3,898, delta -0.4%), the Quadro K2000D (3,919, delta -0.9%), and the GeForce MX110 (3,834, delta 1.3%). This positioning shows the Radeon’s average score (3,883) is actually lower than several of these rivals, despite its much higher OpenCL peak. The discrepancy between the 5,183 OpenCL score and the 3,883 average suggests the Radeon’s performance is uneven across different workloads.

The benchmark data shows a clear split: in pure OpenCL compute, the Radeon R5 Graphics is substantially faster, but its overall average is dragged down by other tests. The Quadro 2000D, by contrast, is more consistent, its single OpenCL score (3,930) is very close to its average (3,930), indicating stable performance across the board.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification field. The process node differs: 40 nm for NVIDIA, 28 nm for AMD. Transistor counts diverge significantly, 1,170 million for the Quadro 2000D versus 2,410 million for the Radeon R5 Graphics. Die size is similar (238 mm² vs 245 mm²), but transistor density nearly doubles: 4.9M/mm² versus 9.8M/mm².

Shading units favor AMD (256 vs 192), while TMUs favor NVIDIA (32 vs 16) and ROPs favor NVIDIA by a wide margin (16 vs 4). Pixel rate is 5.000 GPixel/s for the Quadro 2000D versus 3.032 GPixel/s for the Radeon. Texture rate is 20.00 GTexel/s versus 12.13 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 480.0 GFLOPS for NVIDIA versus 388.1 GFLOPS for AMD.

Memory specifications are fundamentally different. The Quadro 2000D has 1024 MB GDDR5, a 128-bit bus, and 41.60 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon R5 Graphics uses System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth. Memory clock is 650 MHz (2.6 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA, with no equivalent for AMD.

TDP differs: 62 W for the Quadro 2000D versus 15 W for the Radeon R5 Graphics. The form factors are incompatible, the Quadro is single-slot with no power connectors but a 250 W suggested PSU, while the Radeon is an IGP with no PSU requirement listed. The bus interface is PCIe 2.0 x16 for NVIDIA versus IGP for AMD. Display outputs are 2x DVI versus Motherboard Dependent.

API support shows differences in DirectX version (12 (11_0) vs 12 (12_0)) and Vulkan (none vs 1.2.170). Release dates are separated by nearly three years: October 4, 2011 for the Quadro 2000D, and September 16, 2014 for the Radeon R5 Graphics. The NVIDIA card has a launch MSRP of 599 USD, while the AMD part has no launch MSRP listed. The Quadro 2000D measures 178 mm (7 inches) in length and 111 mm (4.4 inches) in height; the Radeon has no dimensions listed.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics wins decisively in raw OpenCL compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 5,183 is 24.2% higher than the Quadro 2000D’s 3,930. This makes the Radeon the stronger choice for workloads that leverage OpenCL acceleration, such as general-purpose GPU compute tasks. The Radeon also holds advantages in shader count (256 vs 192) and API support, it adds Vulkan 1.2.170, which the Quadro lacks entirely.

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D wins in several critical areas despite losing the OpenCL test. Its pixel rate (5.000 GPixel/s) is 65% higher than the Radeon’s 3.032 GPixel/s, and its texture rate (20.00 GTexel/s) is 65% higher than the Radeon’s 12.13 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is also higher at 480.0 GFLOPS versus 388.1 GFLOPS. These numbers indicate the Quadro is better suited for rasterization-heavy workloads where pixel and texture throughput matter most.

The Quadro 2000D also wins on memory bandwidth. Its dedicated 41.60 GB/s of GDDR5 bandwidth is a fixed, predictable figure, whereas the Radeon’s System Shared memory performance is System Dependent. For applications that are bandwidth-sensitive, the Quadro’s dedicated memory offers a clear advantage. The Quadro also has more ROPs (16 vs 4), which directly impacts fill-rate-bound scenarios.

Power efficiency favors the Radeon R5 Graphics. At 15 W, it consumes 75.8% less power than the Quadro 2000D’s 62 W. This makes the Radeon a compelling option for low-power or integrated systems where thermal and power budgets are tight. The Radeon’s IGP form factor also simplifies system integration, as it requires no PCIe slot, power connectors, or dedicated cooling.

For average benchmark stability, the Quadro 2000D is the more consistent performer. Its average benchmark score (3,930) matches its OpenCL score exactly, while the Radeon’s average (3,883) is substantially lower than its OpenCL peak (5,183). This suggests the Quadro delivers more predictable performance across varied workloads, whereas the Radeon excels in specific compute tasks but falls behind in others.

In summary, the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics wins for OpenCL compute and power efficiency, while the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D wins for pixel/texture throughput, FP32 compute, memory bandwidth, and overall benchmark consistency. The choice between them depends on whether the primary workload is compute-heavy (AMD) or graphics-rasterization-heavy (NVIDIA).