Intel Arc Pro B60 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2000D Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the performance difference between the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D and the Intel Arc Pro B60?

A: The recorded data shows a massive gap. The K2000D scores 3919 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Arc Pro B60 has a Passmark G3D score of 14580 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2646. The Arc Pro B60's FP32 compute is 12.29 TFLOPS compared to 732.7 GFLOPS for the K2000D.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The Arc Pro B60 has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 456.0 GB/s bandwidth. The K2000D has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc Pro B60 offers 12 times the memory capacity and over 7 times the bandwidth.

Q: How do their transistor counts and process nodes compare?

A: The Arc Pro B60 uses a 5 nm TSMC process with 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, giving a density of 72.1M per mm². The K2000D uses a 28 nm TSMC process with 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, yielding 10.8M per mm². The Arc Pro B60 has over 15 times more transistors.

Q: What are the DirectX API support levels?

A: The K2000D supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the Arc Pro B60 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). This means the Arc Pro B60 supports the full feature set of DirectX 12 Ultimate, including hardware ray tracing, whereas the K2000D is limited to the older 11_0 feature level.

Q: Which card has ray tracing cores?

A: Only the Arc Pro B60 has 20 dedicated ray tracing cores. The K2000D has no ray tracing hardware at all. This is a fundamental architectural difference between the Kepler generation and the Xe2-HPG generation.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The K2000D has a TDP of 51 W with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Arc Pro B60 has a TDP of 200 W, requires a single 8-pin connector, and suggests a 550 W PSU. The Arc Pro B60 consumes nearly four times the power.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Quadro K2000D is built on the Kepler architecture, specifically the GK107 chip, fabricated on a 28 nm TSMC process. It contains 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die. The Intel Arc Pro B60 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture with the BMG-G21 chip, built on a 5 nm TSMC process. It packs 19,600 million transistors onto a 272 mm² die, representing a transistor density of 72.1M per mm² versus 10.8M per mm² for the K2000D.

The shading unit counts differ dramatically. The K2000D has 384 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The Arc Pro B60 has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. This translates to a pixel rate of 7.632 GPixel/s and texture rate of 30.53 GTexel/s for the K2000D, while the Arc Pro B60 achieves 192.0 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s respectively.

Ray tracing is a major differentiator. The Arc Pro B60 includes 20 dedicated RT cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing. The K2000D has no RT cores, being from a generation before ray tracing was introduced. The Arc Pro B60 also supports FP16 compute at 24.58 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio against FP32, while the K2000D has no FP16 capability listed.

Memory architecture is another fundamental difference. The K2000D uses 2 GB of GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and memory clock of 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The Arc Pro B60 uses 24 GB of GDDR6 with a 192-bit bus and memory clock of 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective). The bandwidth advantage is substantial: 456.0 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s.

The bus interfaces differ as well. The K2000D uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the Arc Pro B60 uses PCIe 5.0 x8. The display outputs are also different: the K2000D offers 2x DVI and 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2, whereas the Arc Pro B60 provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1. The K2000D is a single-slot card measuring 202 mm by 111 mm, while the Arc Pro B60 is dual-slot at 167 mm by 69 mm by 40 mm.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct head-to-head benchmark data is empty, but the individual benchmark scores tell a clear story. The K2000D has a single recorded Geekbench OpenCL score of 3919, placing it in the 23rd percentile of all GPUs. The Arc Pro B60 has multiple benchmark entries, including a Passmark G3D score of 14580, placing it in the 20th percentile.

The FP32 compute performance is the starkest comparison. The Arc Pro B60 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS, which is approximately 16.8 times the 732.7 GFLOPS of the K2000D. This is not an incremental improvement; it is an order-of-magnitude leap in raw computational throughput.

In terms of fill rates, the Arc Pro B60's texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s is about 12.6 times the K2000D's 30.53 GTexel/s. The pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s is roughly 25 times the K2000D's 7.632 GPixel/s. These ratios reflect both the higher core counts and the much higher clock speeds on the Arc Pro B60, which boosts to 2400 MHz with a 2000 MHz base, while the K2000D has no listed base or boost clock.

The nearest rivals for the K2000D include the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D at 3930 (0.3% above), the Quadro 2000 at 3898 (0.5% below), the GeForce GT 745M at 3953 (0.9% above), and the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics at 3883 (0.9% below). The Arc Pro B60's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 at 3163 (0.6% below), the GeForce GT 640 at 3210 (0.9% above), the GeForce 920M at 3287 (3.2% above), and the GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER at 3075 (3.5% below). These rival comparisons show that both cards sit in the lower percentiles of the overall GPU landscape, but the Arc Pro B60's absolute scores are far higher in the tests where they overlap.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear generational and performance chasm. The Intel Arc Pro B60 is superior in every measurable compute and graphics metric. It has more memory, higher bandwidth, more shading units, faster clocks, and modern API support. The K2000D is an end-of-life product from 2013, while the Arc Pro B60 was released in 2025 and remains active.

The K2000D's percentile ranking of 23 is actually slightly higher than the Arc Pro B60's 20th percentile, but this is misleading. The percentile is based on average benchmark scores across different test suites, and the Arc Pro B60's average of 3182 is dragged down by its Passmark DirectX scores of 61, 76, 122, and 179 for DX10, DX12, DX11, and DX9 respectively. These low legacy API scores contrast sharply with its Passmark G3D score of 14580, suggesting the Arc Pro B60 is optimized for modern workloads rather than legacy compatibility.

For professional workloads requiring current DirectX 12 Ultimate features, ray tracing, or large memory footprints, the Arc Pro B60 is the only viable choice. The K2000D's 2 GB memory and lack of RT cores severely limit its modern utility. For users with legacy applications that rely on older DirectX versions, the K2000D's compatibility with DirectX 12 (11_0) may be sufficient, but its compute capabilities are dwarfed by the Arc Pro B60.

The launch MSRP of the K2000D is 599 USD, while the Arc Pro B60 has a launch MSRP of 499 USD. The Arc Pro B60 offers substantially more performance at a lower launch price, making the choice straightforward for new purchases. However, the K2000D's 51 W TDP and no power connector requirement make it suitable for systems with minimal power delivery, whereas the Arc Pro B60 requires a 550 W PSU and an 8-pin connector.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro K2000D | Intel Arc Pro B60 |

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

| Architecture | Kepler | Xe2-HPG |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 1,270 million | 19,600 million |

| Die Size | 118 mm² | 272 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 10.8M / mm² | 72.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 2400 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps) | 2375 MHz (19 Gbps) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 456.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 32 | 160 |

| ROPs | 16 | 80 |

| RT Cores | None | 20 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.632 GPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 30.53 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 732.7 GFLOPS | 12.29 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 51 W | 200 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-DP 1.2 | 4x mini-DP 2.1 |

| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | 202 mm x 111 mm | 167 mm x 69 mm x 40 mm |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2013-02-28 | 2025-09-04 |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | 499 USD |

Where Each One Wins

The Arc Pro B60 wins in every compute-intensive scenario. Its FP32 throughput of 12.29 TFLOPS versus 732.7 GFLOPS makes it suitable for tasks like machine learning inference, scientific simulation, and complex 3D rendering. The 24 GB memory capacity and 456.0 GB/s bandwidth enable working with large datasets and high-resolution textures that would exhaust the K2000D's 2 GB frame buffer almost immediately.

The Arc Pro B60's 20 RT cores provide hardware ray tracing support, a feature completely absent from the K2000D. This makes the Arc Pro B60 the only choice for modern rendering workflows that incorporate ray-traced lighting, shadows, or reflections. The DirectX 12 Ultimate support ensures compatibility with current game engines and professional applications that leverage mesh shaders, variable rate shading, and other advanced features.

The K2000D wins in power efficiency and legacy compatibility. Its 51 W TDP means it can run in systems without auxiliary power connectors, and its suggested 250 W PSU requirement is far more forgiving than the Arc Pro B60's 550 W recommendation. The K2000D's PCIe 2.0 x16 interface is compatible with older motherboards, and its DirectX 12 (11_0) support covers a wide range of legacy applications.

The K2000D's nearest rivals show it performs within 0.9% of cards like the Quadro 2000 and Radeon R5 Graphics, indicating it is competitive within its own generation. The Arc Pro B60's nearest rivals include the RTX 5080 SUPER, which it trails by 3.5%, showing it is competitive with some newer cards despite its lower percentile ranking.

For users with legacy DVI-based display setups, the K2000D's 2x DVI outputs are directly compatible, while the Arc Pro B60 requires adapters for DVI. The Arc Pro B60's 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs support higher resolutions and refresh rates, making it the better choice for multi-monitor modern setups.