GPU Comparison

The data presents a clear, if narrow, picture: in the only shared benchmark, the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics outperforms the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D by a significant margin. However, the two chips occupy vastly different design philosophies and use cases, making a simple performance ranking insufficient. This analysis breaks down their head-to-head results, architectural foundations, and the specific workloads where each part holds an advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test. Here, the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics delivers a score of 5183, while the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D scores 3919. This results in a deltaPct of -24.4% for the NVIDIA part, meaning the AMD solution is approximately 24.4% faster in this compute-oriented workload. This is a substantial lead for the integrated graphics processor, which is notable given that the Quadro is a discrete, professional-grade card.

Contextualizing this result with their nearest rivals reinforces the divide. The Radeon R5’s average benchmark score of 3883 places it just 0.9% behind the Quadro K2000D, yet its peak OpenCL score of 5183 shows a strong ability to excel in specific compute scenarios. Meanwhile, the Quadro K2000D’s average score of 3919 is practically tied with its direct predecessor, the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D (3930, a -0.3% delta), and the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 (3898, a +0.5% delta). The performance envelope for the K2000D is tightly clustered around its 3900-point mark, suggesting it offers consistent, predictable compute output across its generation. In contrast, the Radeon R5’s variance between its average (3883) and its peak OpenCL score (5183) indicates a more volatile but potentially more powerful compute core when conditions are favorable.

The head-to-head winner is unambiguous, but the benchmark’s nature is crucial. OpenCL is a general-purpose compute API, and the Radeon R5’s victory here does not automatically translate to wins in graphics rendering or professional CAD tasks, where the Quadro’s drivers and feature set are traditionally optimized. The data shows a clear win for AMD in this single test, yet the narrow field of comparison means this result should be weighed against the architectural and specification differences detailed below.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental disparity between these two products lies in their architectural origins and physical implementation. The NVIDIA Quadro K2000D is a discrete, single-slot expansion card built on the Kepler architecture. Its chip, the GK107, is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The die is 118 mm² and contains 1,270 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 10.8M per mm². This is a mature, dedicated graphics processor designed for workstation environments, with a 51 W TDP and a suggested power supply of 250 W. It interfaces with the system via a PCIe 2.0 x16 bus.

The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is a fundamentally different entity: an integrated graphics processor (IGP) embedded within a larger APU. It uses the GCN 2.0 architecture and is built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The chip in question, "Spectre SL," is the entire APU die, which is significantly larger at 245 mm² and contains 2,410 million transistors. This results in a slightly lower transistor density of 9.8M per mm², as a substantial portion of the die is dedicated to CPU cores, not just the GPU. The Radeon R5’s TDP is a mere 15 W, and it operates as an IGP, drawing on system memory and relying on the motherboard for connectivity.

These physical differences dictate their performance characteristics. The Quadro K2000D has a dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R5 has no dedicated video memory; it uses "System Shared" memory, with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." This is a critical bottleneck for the integrated part. The Quadro’s dedicated memory ensures consistent bandwidth for textures and framebuffers, while the Radeon must contend with the CPU for memory access.

Compute resources also differ sharply. The Quadro K2000D fields 384 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The Radeon R5, by contrast, has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and only 4 ROPs. This explains the massive difference in pixel and texture rates: the Quadro achieves 7.632 GPixel/s and 30.53 GTexel/s, while the Radeon manages only 3.032 GPixel/s and 12.13 GTexel/s. The Radeon’s peak FP32 throughput is 388.1 GFLOPS, less than half of the Quadro’s 732.7 GFLOPS. Despite this, the Radeon wins in OpenCL, suggesting the GCN architecture’s compute efficiency and the higher clock potential of the smaller GPU portion within the APU can overcome its raw resource deficit in certain workloads.

API support is a point of differentiation. The Radeon R5 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Quadro K2000D is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. While both support OpenGL 4.6, the Radeon’s full DirectX 12 feature level is a significant modern advantage. The Quadro also supports a narrower set of display outputs (2x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2) compared to the Radeon’s "Motherboard Dependent" outputs, which are dictated by the host system’s ports.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is faster, scoring 5183 compared to the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D’s 3919, a deltaPct of -24.4% for the NVIDIA part.

Q: Do the two GPUs have the same amount of memory?

A: No. The NVIDIA Quadro K2000D has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory with a 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics uses System Shared memory, and its bandwidth is System Dependent.

Q: What are the key differences in their peak fill rates?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2000D has a pixel rate of 7.632 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 30.53 GTexel/s. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics has a pixel rate of 3.032 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 12.13 GTexel/s.

Q: Which GPU supports a more modern DirectX feature level?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D supports DirectX 12 (11_0).

Q: What is the physical form factor of each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2000D is a single-slot, discrete card with a 202 mm length and 111 mm height. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is an IGP, meaning it is integrated into the motherboard and has no physical dimensions listed.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare to their direct rivals?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics has an average score of 3883, placing it 0.9% behind the Quadro K2000D and 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce MX110. The Quadro K2000D’s average of 3919 puts it 0.3% behind the Quadro 2000D and 0.5% ahead of the Quadro 2000.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro K2000D | AMD Radeon R5 Graphics |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 2.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Chip | GK107 | Spectre SL |

| Transistors | 1,270 million | 2,410 million |

| Die Size | 118 mm² | 245 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 10.8M / mm² | 9.8M / mm² |

| Memory | 2 GB GDDR5 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 384 | 256 |

| TMUs | 32 | 16 |

| ROPs | 16 | 4 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.632 GPixel/s | 3.032 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 30.53 GTexel/s | 12.13 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 732.7 GFLOPS | 388.1 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 51 W | 15 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | N/A |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | N/A |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | IGP |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 | Motherboard Dependent |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.175 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2013-02-28 | 2014-09-16 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Fermi | TeraScale 3 IGP |

| Successor | Quadro Maxwell | GCN 3.0 IGP |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | N/A |

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA Quadro K2000D:

The Quadro K2000D wins in every traditional graphics throughput metric. Its dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory and 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth provide a massive advantage over the Radeon’s system-shared memory. This translates to superior fill rates, with the Quadro delivering more than double the pixel rate (7.632 vs. 3.032 GPixel/s) and nearly triple the texture rate (30.53 vs. 12.13 GTexel/s). For any workload that is bandwidth-bound or requires high fill rates, such as rendering high-resolution textures, multi-sampled anti-aliasing, or complex 3D scenes in professional CAD applications, the Quadro’s dedicated memory and higher ROP and TMU counts give it a decisive edge. Its higher FP32 throughput (732.7 vs. 388.1 GFLOPS) also suggests faster performance in general-purpose compute that is not optimized for the GCN architecture’s specific strengths. As a discrete card, it offers a consistent, predictable performance envelope, as evidenced by its benchmark scores being tightly clustered with its nearest rivals. This makes it a reliable choice for workstation tasks where stability and driver certification are paramount. The data also shows it has a higher transistor density, indicating a more tightly packed GPU core.

AMD Radeon R5 Graphics:

The Radeon R5 Graphics wins the only head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by a significant 24.4% margin. This indicates that for specific compute workloads, particularly those that leverage the GCN 2.0 architecture’s asynchronous compute and general-purpose processing capabilities, the integrated Radeon core can outperform the older Kepler-based discrete card. Its architectural advantage is further solidified by its support for DirectX 12 (12_0), a full-feature implementation that the Quadro lacks. This makes the Radeon R5 a better fit for modern gaming and applications that utilize the latest graphics API features. The Radeon’s massive energy efficiency advantage is also a clear win: at a 15 W TDP versus the Quadro’s 51 W, it delivers its winning OpenCL performance at a fraction of the power draw. This makes it ideal for low-power, compact systems where energy consumption and heat dissipation are critical factors. For users building a system with an AMD APU, the Radeon R5 provides a "good enough" graphics solution for everyday tasks and light gaming, with a clear edge in specific compute benchmarks. Its "System Shared" memory model allows for flexible allocation, though performance will be dependent on the system’s memory speed and configuration.