AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile vs NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Comparison

AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile and NVIDIA Quadro P2000 occupy different corners of the GPU landscape, with the former serving as an integrated processor and the latter as a dedicated workstation card. The benchmark data, drawn from a single head-to-head test, shows a decisive victory for the NVIDIA Quadro P2000, but the architecture and specification differences reveal why each product exists for distinct purposes.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile wins in the category of power efficiency and integration. As an IGP (Integrated Graphics Processor) with a 10 W TDP, it consumes a fraction of the power of a dedicated card. It is designed for portable devices where space and thermal headroom are at a premium. This is not a performance-oriented part; its single OpenCL benchmark score of 6476 places it in the 37th percentile of all GPUs, which is modest but not bottom-of-the-barrel.

The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 wins decisively in raw performance. In the only head-to-head benchmark available, Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P2000 scores 20125, which is 67.8% higher than the AMD part's 6476. The Quadro P2000 also demonstrates versatility across multiple benchmark suites, with a Passmark G3D score of 6956, a Passmark G2D score of 626, and a Passmark GPU Compute score of 2933. Its average benchmark score of 6049 is slightly lower than its best single test, but it still places in the 35th percentile of all GPUs, which is close to the AMD part's percentile despite the huge gap in peak performance.

The use-case split is clear. The AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile is for systems where a dedicated GPU is impractical, offering a baseline level of graphical capability with zero additional power draw beyond the CPU package. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 is for workstations requiring sustained, higher-throughput compute for professional applications, with its 75 W TDP and dedicated 5 GB GDDR5 memory providing a substantial performance advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile uses the GCN 5.0 architecture with the Raven-M chip, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 uses the Pascal architecture with the GP106 chip, fabricated on a 16 nm process at TSMC. The process node difference is minor, but the architectural philosophies diverge sharply.

The AMD part is a Vega IGP from the Raven Ridge-M generation, integrating 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. It has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1301 MHz. Its memory subsystem is entirely system-shared, with no dedicated VRAM, making bandwidth "System Dependent." This is a design that prioritizes low cost and low power over throughput.

The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 is a standalone Pascal generation card, featuring 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. It has a base clock of 1076 MHz and a boost clock of 1480 MHz. It uses 5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 140.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The transistor counts are similar — 4,940 million for AMD and 4,400 million for NVIDIA — and die sizes are close at 210 mm² and 200 mm², respectively. However, the NVIDIA chip allocates its resources differently, with 60% more shading units and 5x the ROPs, directly contributing to its higher pixel and texture rates.

Feature support also differs. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, but the NVIDIA part supports Vulkan 1.4 while the AMD part supports Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA card also has dedicated display outputs (4x DisplayPort 1.4a), while the AMD IGP's outputs are "Portable Device Dependent."

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single head-to-head benchmark result is stark. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 20125, while the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile scores 6476. This represents a delta of -67.8% for the AMD part, meaning the NVIDIA card is more than three times faster in this compute-oriented test.

This result is consistent with the raw specification gaps. The Quadro P2000 has a pixel rate of 59.20 GPixel/s versus 10.41 GPixel/s for the AMD part — a 5.7x advantage. Its texture rate is 94.72 GTexel/s versus 52.04 GTexel/s, a 1.8x advantage. In FP32 throughput, the NVIDIA card delivers 3.031 TFLOPS versus 1.665 TFLOPS, a 1.8x advantage. The memory bandwidth difference is even more pronounced: 140.2 GB/s versus "System Dependent" for the AMD IGP, which in practice means the NVIDIA card has predictable, high-bandwidth access to its own 5 GB of GDDR5 memory.

The closest rivals for the AMD part in the database are the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M (6481, -0.1% delta), NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M (6493, -0.3% delta), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M (6513, -0.6% delta). This shows the AMD IGP is roughly on par with older mobile discrete GPUs. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 760M (6019, +0.5% delta for the P2000) and the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6001, +0.8% delta), indicating it sits in a performance tier that is competitive with more modern integrated solutions but with a clear edge in the OpenCL test.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 20125 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile scores 6476, a difference of -67.8% for the AMD part.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile has a TDP of 10 W, while the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 has a TDP of 75 W. The AMD part is an IGP with no power connectors, while the NVIDIA card also has no power connectors but suggests a 250 W PSU for the system.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile uses system-shared memory with no dedicated VRAM. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 has 5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 160-bit bus with 140.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 has 1024 shading units, while the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile has 640 shading units. The NVIDIA part also has 64 TMUs versus 40, and 40 ROPs versus 8.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life. The AMD part was released on 2019-01-07, and the NVIDIA part was released on 2017-02-05.

Q: What is the performance percentile for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile is in the 37th percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 is in the 35th percentile. Despite the lower percentile, the NVIDIA card's raw scores are much higher, indicating the percentile is skewed by a broader distribution of scores.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 is the superior choice for any workload that demands raw compute throughput, benefiting from its dedicated memory, higher clock speeds, and more than 1.8x the FP32 throughput of the AMD part. Its 5 GB GDDR5 memory with 140.2 GB/s bandwidth ensures that memory-bound tasks are not bottlenecked by system RAM. For professional workstation use, where sustained performance in OpenCL or Vulkan workloads is critical, the Quadro P2000 is the only viable option between the two.

The AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile is not a competitor in the same arena. Its 10 W TDP and system-shared memory make it suitable for lightweight portable devices where battery life and thermal limits are paramount. Its 37th percentile ranking, while low, still places it ahead of some older discrete mobile GPUs like the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M and GTX 670M in the database, showing it is not without merit for basic graphical tasks.

Users should pick the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile if they need an integrated solution with minimal power draw and no separate card. Users should pick the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 if they need a dedicated card with professional-grade compute performance, multiple DisplayPort outputs, and a single-slot form factor. The 67.8% delta in the head-to-head benchmark leaves no ambiguity about which one wins on performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile | NVIDIA Quadro P2000 |

|----------------|---------------------------|---------------------|

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Pascal |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 16 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 4,940 million | 4,400 million |

| Die Size | 210 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Base Clock | 300 MHz | 1076 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1301 MHz | 1480 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 5 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | System Shared | 160 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 140.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 40 | 64 |

| ROPs | 8 | 40 |

| Pixel Rate | 10.41 GPixel/s | 59.20 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 52.04 GTexel/s | 94.72 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1.665 TFLOPS | 3.031 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 3.331 TFLOPS (2:1) | 47.36 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | 10 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Bus Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2019-01-07 | 2017-02-05 |

| Predecessor | GCN 3.0 IGP | Quadro Maxwell |

| Successor | Navi II IGP | Quadro Volta |