AMD Radeon R5 M335 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2000D Comparison

The AMD Radeon R5 M335 and NVIDIA Quadro K2000D represent two very different design philosophies from the same 28 nm manufacturing generation. The database places the AMD part in the 28th percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA card sits at the 23rd percentile. This places both firmly in the entry-level segment, but the benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy between them. The Radeon R5 M335 leads the Quadro K2000D in the only shared benchmark test, and a closer look at the specifications reveals the architectural trade-offs that explain this result.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M335 scores 4,745 points versus 3,919 points for the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D. This represents a 17.4% advantage for the AMD part in the database's head-to-head measurement.

Q: How does the Radeon R5 M335 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD part averages 4,752 points across all recorded benchmarks. It sits 0.5% above the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX, 0.7% below the AMD Radeon R5 M255, and 1.5% above the NVIDIA Quadro P400. Interestingly, it is only 0.8% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB in this particular database metric.

Q: What is the performance context for the Quadro K2000D?

A: The NVIDIA card's average score is 3,919 points. It trails the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D by 0.3% and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M by 0.9%, while leading the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 by 0.5% and the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics by 0.9%. These are all very close results, indicating the K2000D is tightly clustered with its immediate competitors.

Q: What memory configurations do these two GPUs use?

A: The Quadro K2000D uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R5 M335 also has 2 GB of memory, but it is DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, which limits its bandwidth to just 14.40 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU offers better raw throughput numbers?

A: The Quadro K2000D has higher texture fill rate at 30.53 GTexel/s versus 20.60 GTexel/s for the Radeon R5 M335. It also leads in FP32 compute with 732.7 GFLOPS versus 659.2 GFLOPS. However, the Radeon wins on pixel rate with 8.240 GPixel/s compared to 7.632 GPixel/s.

Q: What are the API support differences?

A: Both GPUs support DirectX 12, but the Quadro K2000D implements the 11_0 feature level while the Radeon R5 M335 implements 11_1. OpenGL 4.6 is available on both. Vulkan support is nearly identical, with version 1.2.175 on the NVIDIA card and 1.2.170 on the AMD card.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward recommendation for raw compute performance: the AMD Radeon R5 M335 is the faster GPU. Its 4,745 OpenCL score versus 3,919 for the Quadro K2000D is a significant 17.4% gap. The AMD part's average benchmark score of 4,752 also places it in a higher percentile (28th) than the NVIDIA card (23rd). For any workload that relies on general-purpose compute through OpenCL, the Radeon R5 M335 is the clear choice.

However, the Quadro K2000D has its own strengths that matter in specific contexts. It offers substantially higher memory bandwidth at 64.00 GB/s, which is more than four times the 14.40 GB/s of the AMD part. Its texture rate of 30.53 GTexel/s is also 48% higher. The NVIDIA card also has a professional pedigree with a Quadro branding, a single-slot design, and display outputs including 2x DVI and 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2. The Radeon R5 M335 has no fixed dimensions and its display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," indicating it is designed for mobile or embedded applications.

For users who need a professional workstation card with specific display connectivity and higher memory bandwidth, the Quadro K2000D remains viable despite its lower compute scores. For users who prioritize OpenCL performance and a higher overall benchmark percentile, the Radeon R5 M335 is the superior pick. The data shows two GPUs with different strengths, and the choice depends entirely on workload requirements.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark between these two GPUs is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are decisive. The AMD Radeon R5 M335 scores 4,745 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D scores 3,919 points. The delta is 17.4% in favor of AMD, which is a substantial margin in the entry-level segment. The database records this as a single win for the AMD part.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the AMD Radeon R5 M335 also has a Vulkan score of 4,758 points, which closely matches its OpenCL result. This consistency suggests stable performance across different compute APIs. The Quadro K2000D only has a single recorded OpenCL benchmark, so no Vulkan comparison is possible.

The nearest rival data provides additional context. The Quadro K2000D's closest competitor is the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D with an average score of 3,930, a difference of only 0.3%. This places the K2000D in a very tight competitive cluster. The AMD Radeon R5 M335's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX at 4,727 points (0.5% behind) and the NVIDIA Quadro P400 at 4,684 points (1.5% behind). The AMD part is clearly positioned in a slightly higher performance tier.

The most striking comparison from the rival data is that the Radeon R5 M335 is only 0.8% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB, which scores 4,791 points. This is a remarkable result for an entry-level GPU, although it should be noted that this is a single benchmark metric and does not reflect gaming performance or other workloads. The data simply shows that in this particular compute test, the R5 M335 punches well above its weight.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across almost every core specification. The NVIDIA Quadro K2000D uses the GK107 chip with 384 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The AMD Radeon R5 M335 uses the Exo chip with 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The NVIDIA part has more of every unit type, yet it loses in the compute benchmark.

Memory configurations are starkly different. The Quadro K2000D uses GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with a bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s. The Radeon R5 M335 uses DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with a bandwidth of only 14.40 GB/s. Both have 2 GB of memory, but the NVIDIA card has a fourfold bandwidth advantage.

Pixel and texture rates tell a mixed story. The Quadro K2000D achieves 7.632 GPixel/s and 30.53 GTexel/s. The Radeon R5 M335 achieves 8.240 GPixel/s and 20.60 GTexel/s. The AMD part is 8% faster on pixel rate, but the NVIDIA part is 48% faster on texture rate. FP32 compute is 732.7 GFLOPS for NVIDIA versus 659.2 GFLOPS for AMD, an 11% advantage for the Quadro.

The bus interface also differs. The Quadro K2000D uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the Radeon R5 M335 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The power situation is different as well, with the Quadro having a 51 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the Radeon has no recorded TDP or PSU recommendation. Both cards require no external power connectors.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Quadro K2000D is built on the Kepler architecture using the GK107 chip. It is manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC with 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 10.8M per mm². The AMD Radeon R5 M335 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Exo chip, also on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but with only 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, resulting in a higher density of 12.3M per mm².

The transistor count difference is substantial, with the NVIDIA chip having nearly double the transistors of the AMD chip. However, the AMD chip achieves higher density on a smaller die, which is typical for a more modern architecture design. The Radeon R5 M335 belongs to the Gem System generation under the R5 M300 series, while the Quadro K2000D is part of the Quadro Kepler Kx000 generation.

The NVIDIA card is a professional workstation part with a predecessor in Quadro Fermi and a successor in Quadro Maxwell. Its display outputs include 2x DVI and 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2, and it comes in a single-slot form factor with a length of 202 mm. The AMD Radeon R5 M335 has a predecessor in Solar System and a successor in Polaris Mobile, indicating its mobile-oriented lineage. Its display outputs are simply listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its intended use in laptops and portable systems.

The API support is nearly identical, with both supporting DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2. The only difference is the DirectX feature level, where the Quadro K2000D supports 11_0 and the Radeon R5 M335 supports 11_1. The Quadro K2000D was released in early 2013 with a launch MSRP of 599 USD, while the Radeon R5 M335 came later in late 2015 with no recorded launch MSRP. Both are now end-of-life products, but the data shows that the newer AMD architecture delivers better compute performance despite having fewer resources on paper.