AMD Radeon R8 M445DX vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is decisive: the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX outperforms the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 in the single recorded test. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD part scores 4727, while the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 records 3898. This represents a 17.5% advantage for the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX, a substantial margin in raw compute throughput.

The database's head-to-head comparison confirms this result, with the AMD unit winning the only direct comparison. The Quadro 2000 trails by 17.5%, a gap that places it firmly behind in OpenCL compute workloads. This is not a marginal difference; it is a clear generational step in performance.

Contextualizing the scores, the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX sits at the 27th percentile among all GPUs, while the Quadro 2000 sits at the 23rd percentile. This means the AMD part lands in a higher performance tier overall. The AMD's closest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon R5 M335, which scores 4752, only 0.5% higher than the M445DX, indicating the M445DX is performing right at its expected level for its class. The NVIDIA Quadro P400 scores 4684, which is 0.9% lower than the M445DX, placing the AMD part slightly ahead of that professional card.

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000's nearest rivals tell a similar story of it being in a lower bracket. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics scores 3883, which is only 0.4% below the Quadro 2000. The NVIDIA Quadro K2000D scores 3919, 0.5% higher, and the Quadro 2000D scores 3930, 0.8% higher. The GeForce GT 745M scores 3953, 1.4% higher. This clustering shows the Quadro 2000 is positioned among entry-level graphics solutions, and its performance ceiling is well below that of the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX.

The only benchmark result available is for OpenCL compute. This is a synthetic test that measures raw throughput and parallelism, not gaming or professional 3D rendering. The data shows a clear hierarchy: the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX is firmly one performance tier above the Quadro 2000. No further tests are available to nuance this picture, so the 17.5% score difference stands as the primary statistical relationship between these two cards.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R8 M445DX wins the only recorded comparison, the Geekbench OpenCL test. This means that for general-purpose compute tasks that leverage OpenCL, such as certain video encoding, simulation, or data-processing workloads, the AMD part holds a clear advantage. Its higher raw score suggests it can complete these tasks more quickly.

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000 does not win any direct benchmark comparisons in the database. However, this does not mean it has no strengths. Its architecture and feature set, which are detailed in a later section, may offer different capabilities that are not captured by a single compute test. For instance, the Quadro line is typically designed for professional workstation use, and its driver support and certified application compatibility are often prioritized, though this data is not present in the benchmark scores.

Since the M445DX wins every recorded head-to-head test, the "wins" column shows 1 for AMD and 0 for NVIDIA. For any use case that depends on the measured OpenCL performance, the AMD is the clear choice. The data does not provide evidence for any workload where the Quadro 2000 excels in terms of raw benchmark speed. The win for the AMD is complete, but it is based on a single metric. A broader suite of tests, such as specific gaming benchmarks or professional CAD workloads, would be needed to identify any specific niches where the Quadro 2000 could compete or win, but such data is not in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural eras and have distinct designs. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000 uses the GF106 chip, based on the Fermi architecture, built on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon R8 M445DX uses the Meso chip, based on GCN 3.0, built on a more advanced 28 nm process, also at TSMC. The AMD uses a newer, denser manufacturing technology.

The transistor counts and die sizes reflect the different designs. The NVIDIA chip has 1,170 million transistors on a die size of 238 mm², leading to a transistor density of 4.9 million per mm². The AMD chip has more transistors, 1,550 million, on a much smaller die of 125 mm², resulting in a dramatically higher density of 12.4 million per mm². This indicates that the GCN 3.0 architecture is more efficient in packing compute units.

The memory setups are entirely different. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000 uses a dedicated 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 41.60 GB/s. The AMD Radeon R8 M445DX uses System Shared memory, meaning it has no dedicated video memory and relies on the system's main RAM. Its memory bus width and bandwidth are "System Dependent" and will vary based on the host platform. This is a fundamental design difference, with the Quadro having its own dedicated, faster memory pool, while the AMD part is a mobile IGP solution that shares resources.

The core configurations are also different. The NVIDIA has 192 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The AMD has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. AMD has more shading units for compute, but fewer TMUs and ROPs, which are often more important for pixel fill and texturing in graphics rendering. The clock speeds reflect this: the AMD runs at a base of 780 MHz and a boost of 1021 MHz, while the NVIDIA memory clock is 650 MHz with a 2.6 Gbps effective rate. The NVIDIA's core clocks are not provided in the database.

These architectural differences lead to different theoretical throughput rates. The AMD has a higher FP32 performance rated at 653.4 GFLOPS, while the NVIDIA is rated at 480.0 GFLOPS. The AMD also has a higher pixel rate (8.168 GPixel/s) and texture rate (20.42 GTexel/s) compared to the NVIDIA's 5.000 GPixel/s and 20.00 GTexel/s. The AMD also supports FP16 at a 1:1 rate (653.4 GFLOPS), while the NVIDIA card does not have FP16 capabilities listed.

The bus interface and power profiles are also distinct. The NVIDIA is a discrete card with a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, a TDP of 62 W, and a single-slot form factor. The AMD is an IGP (Integrated Graphics Processor) with no slot width, no listed TDP, and uses a portable device-dependent display output. The NVIDIA has an explicit power connector requirement of "None" and a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the AMD part is an integrated solution. The NVIDIA supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, while the AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon R8 M445DX has a significantly higher Geekbench OpenCL score of 4727, while the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 scores 3898.

Q: What is the percentage difference in the benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Radeon R8 M445DX is 17.5% faster than the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 in the head-to-head Geekbench OpenCL test.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same amount of dedicated video memory?

A: No. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000 has 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 memory, while the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX has no dedicated memory and uses System Shared Memory, making its bandwidth dependent on the system.

Q: What are the architectural generations of these two GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 2000 is based on the older Fermi architecture, built on a 40 nm process. The AMD Radeon R8 M445DX is based on the newer GCN 3.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The AMD Radeon R8 M445DX has a much higher transistor density of 12.4 million transistors per mm², while the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 has 4.9 million transistors per mm².

Q: How does the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 compare to its close rivals?

A: The Quadro 2000's score of 3898 is within 1.4% of its nearest rivals, including the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics, NVIDIA Quadro K2000D, and NVIDIA Quadro 2000D.

The Verdict

The data clearly points to the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX as the superior performer in the only benchmark recorded. With a 17.5% higher OpenCL score, it is in a different performance tier than the NVIDIA Quadro 2000. Anyone needing the best raw compute performance should choose the AMD part.

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000, however, is a discrete graphics card with its own dedicated memory pool. This is a key distinction. If a system requires a dedicated GPU with its own memory, the Quadro 2000 is the only option of the two. The AMD relies on the system's main memory, which can be a bottleneck for memory-intensive tasks and is only suitable for systems with enough system RAM.

For compute workloads that are not memory-limited, the AMD is the clear choice. For systems that need a discrete GPU with a stable, dedicated memory interface, the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 is the only viable pick. The data does not show any gaming or professional 3D rendering benchmarks, so it is not possible to draw conclusions for those specific tasks. The verdict is straightforward: performance favors the AMD, but the NVIDIA has a different, dedicated memory design that may be required for specific use cases.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights the key differences between the two GPUs based on the recorded data.

| Feature | NVIDIA Quadro 2000 | AMD Radeon R8 M445DX |

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

| Manufacturer | NVIDIA | AMD |

| Chip | GF106 | Meso |

| Architecture | Fermi | GCN 3.0 |

| Process Node | 40 nm (TSMC) | 28 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 1,170 million | 1,550 million |

| Die Size | 238 mm² | 125 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 4.9M / mm² | 12.4M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 41.60 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 192 | 320 |

| TMUs | 32 | 20 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 5.000 GPixel/s | 8.168 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 20.00 GTexel/s | 20.42 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 480.0 GFLOPS | 653.4 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not listed | 653.4 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 62 W | Not listed |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | IGP |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| Vulkan Support | Not listed | 1.2.170 |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2010-12-23 | 2016-05-14 |

| Benchmarks (OpenCL) | 3898 | 4727 |