NVIDIA GeForce 920M vs NVIDIA Quadro K2000D Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data includes one direct benchmark comparison between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D scores 3919, while the NVIDIA GeForce 920M scores 3725. The Quadro K2000D wins with a 5.2% advantage, the only head-to-head result captured in the database. That margin is modest, not a commanding lead, but it is consistent across the single available workload.

Looking at the broader benchmark picture, the Quadro K2000D's average score across all recorded tests is 3919, identical to its OpenCL result since that is its only benchmark entry. The GeForce 920M has two recorded benchmarks: an OpenCL score of 3725 and a Vulkan score of 2849. Its average benchmark score is 3287, which is dragged down by the significantly lower Vulkan result. When comparing averages, the Quadro K2000D sits 19.2% above the GeForce 920M (3919 versus 3287), a wider gap than the 5.2% OpenCL difference alone suggests.

The nearest rival data places both cards in similar company. The Quadro K2000D's closest competitors include the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D (average score 3930, delta of -0.3%), the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 (3898, +0.5%), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (3953, -0.9%), and the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics (3883, +0.9%). The Quadro K2000D is effectively within 1% of all four rivals, indicating it sits in a tightly clustered performance band. The GeForce 920M's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M (3316, -0.9%), Intel HD Graphics 530 (3332, -1.4%), NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 (3210, +2.4%), and Intel HD Graphics P4600 (3389, -3%). The 920M trails three of those four by small margins, with only the GT 640 clearly behind it.

Percentile rankings reinforce the positioning. The Quadro K2000D places in the 23rd percentile of all GPUs, while the GeForce 920M sits in the 20th percentile. Both are entry-level performers by modern standards, but the Quadro's higher percentile aligns with its higher average score.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro K2000D wins the only direct head-to-head test, the Geekbench OpenCL workload, by 5.2%. That is the sole recorded victory for either card in the direct comparison data. The GeForce 920M does not win any head-to-head benchmark in the database.

However, the GeForce 920M does have a Vulkan score of 2849, a workload the Quadro K2000D has no recorded result for. That means the 920M demonstrates capability in a modern graphics API that the Quadro cannot be directly measured against. The Quadro's OpenCL score of 3919 remains its only measured strength, while the 920M shows it can handle both OpenCL and Vulkan, albeit with Vulkan performance significantly below its OpenCL result.

For use-case analysis, the Quadro K2000D is better suited to OpenCL compute workloads, where it holds a clear edge. The GeForce 920M, despite losing the OpenCL comparison, offers Vulkan support that may matter for applications built around that API. The 920M also carries a lower TDP of 33 W versus the Quadro's 51 W, making it more appropriate for power-constrained mobile designs, though this is a specification difference rather than a benchmark win.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but they use different chips and architecture revisions. The Quadro K2000D uses the GK107 chip with the original Kepler architecture, while the GeForce 920M uses the GK208B chip with Kepler 2.0. Transistor counts differ: the Quadro packs 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, while the 920M has 1,020 million transistors on a smaller 87 mm² die. Transistor density is slightly higher on the 920M at 11.7M per mm² versus 10.8M per mm² for the Quadro.

The shading units are identical at 384 for both cards, and both have 32 texture mapping units. The key architectural difference lies in render output units: the Quadro has 16 ROPs, while the 920M has only 8. Despite that, both cards achieve the same pixel rate of 7.632 GPixel/s and the same texture rate of 30.53 GTexel/s, and both deliver the same FP32 compute of 732.7 GFLOPS.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The Quadro K2000D uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The GeForce 920M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, delivering just 14.40 GB/s. That is a 4.4x difference in memory bandwidth, a major factor in real-world performance despite identical compute rates. The Quadro's memory clock is 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective), while the 920M runs at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective).

Clock behavior also differs. The Quadro has no listed base or boost clock, while the 920M has a base and boost clock both at 954 MHz. The Quadro's memory bandwidth advantage likely explains its higher OpenCL score despite matching compute throughput.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2000D scores 3919 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce 920M scores 3725. The Quadro wins by 5.2%.

Q: Does the GeForce 920M support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the GeForce 920M has a recorded Geekbench Vulkan score of 2849. The Quadro K2000D has no Vulkan benchmark recorded in the database.

Q: How do the memory bandwidths compare?

A: The Quadro K2000D has 64.00 GB/s bandwidth from 2 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The GeForce 920M has 14.40 GB/s from 2 GB DDR3 on a 64-bit bus.

Q: What are the TDP differences?

A: The Quadro K2000D has a TDP of 51 W, while the GeForce 920M has a TDP of 33 W.

Q: Which GPU has more ROPs?

A: The Quadro K2000D has 16 ROPs, while the GeForce 920M has 8 ROPs. Despite this, both achieve the same pixel rate of 7.632 GPixel/s.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Quadro K2000D has an average score of 3919, while the GeForce 920M averages 3287. The Quadro leads by 19.2%.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro K2000D | NVIDIA GeForce 920M |

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

| Chip | GK107 | GK208B |

| Architecture | Kepler | Kepler 2.0 |

| Generation | Quadro Kepler (Kx000) | GeForce 900M |

| Transistors | 1,270 million | 1,020 million |

| Die Size | 118 mm² | 87 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 10.8M / mm² | 11.7M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 954 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 954 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 14.40 GB/s |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| TDP | 51 W | 33 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

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

| Release Date | 2013-02-28 | 2015-03-12 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Fermi | GeForce 800M |

| Successor | Quadro Maxwell | GeForce 10 Mobile |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | Not listed |

| OpenCL Score | 3919 | 3725 |

| Vulkan Score | Not listed | 2849 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 3919 | 3287 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 23 | 20 |

The Verdict

The data points to the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D as the stronger performer in the only directly comparable workload. Its 5.2% OpenCL lead over the GeForce 920M is reinforced by a 19.2% advantage in average benchmark score. The Quadro also has 4.4x the memory bandwidth, a larger die, more transistors, and double the ROPs. For anyone prioritizing OpenCL compute performance, the Quadro K2000D is the clear choice from the recorded measurements.

The GeForce 920M, however, is not without merit. It has a Vulkan score of 2849, something the Quadro cannot claim, and its lower 33 W TDP makes it more suitable for thin-and-light portable systems where power draw matters. Its smaller die size and lower transistor count also suggest a more efficient design per transistor density, at 11.7M per mm² versus 10.8M per mm².

The nearest rival data shows both cards occupy the same low-end performance tier. The Quadro K2000D's rivals are all within 1% of its score, and the 920M trails most of its rivals by small margins. Neither card is a performance leader; both sit in the 20th to 23rd percentile of all GPUs.

For OpenCL-centric workflows or any task sensitive to memory bandwidth, the Quadro K2000D is the safer pick based on the data. For Vulkan-capable applications or power-constrained mobile deployments, the GeForce 920M offers features the Quadro lacks. The decision ultimately hinges on which API and form factor matter more, as the raw compute rates are identical at 732.7 GFLOPS.