NVIDIA GeForce 930M vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data provides a single head-to-head comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce 930M and the NVIDIA Quadro 2000, using Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the GeForce 930M records a score of 5046, while the Quadro 2000 scores 3898. The GeForce 930M wins this comparison with a 29.5% advantage.

Looking at the broader database context, the GeForce 930M holds an average benchmark score of 4388, which places it in the 26th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M (average score 4411, 0.5% behind), the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 (average score 4360, 0.7% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 (average score 4335, 1.2% behind), and the AMD FirePro W2100 (average score 4295, 2.2% behind). This suggests the GeForce 930M sits in a tightly contested mid-range cluster where small score differences separate competitors.

The Quadro 2000, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 3898, placing it in the 23rd percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D (average score 3930, 0.8% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (average score 3953, 1.4% ahead), the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D (average score 3919, 0.5% ahead), and the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics (average score 3883, 0.4% behind). The Quadro 2000 sits in a similar tight cluster, but at a lower performance tier.

The data indicates that the GeForce 930M is the stronger performer in raw compute workloads, particularly in OpenCL, which is often used for general-purpose GPU computing. The Quadro 2000, despite its professional workstation branding, does not demonstrate a performance advantage in this specific metric. The GeForce 930M also has a Vulkan benchmark score of 3729, while no Vulkan score is recorded for the Quadro 2000, which likely reflects the newer architecture's broader API support.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and process technologies. The GeForce 930M uses the GM108S chip built on the Maxwell architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The Quadro 2000 uses the GF106 chip based on the Fermi architecture, also from TSMC but on a 40 nm process. The transistor counts are comparable, with the GeForce 930M carrying 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, while the Quadro 2000 carries 1,170 million transistors on a much larger 238 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 13.2 million per mm² for the GeForce 930M versus 4.9 million per mm² for the Quadro 2000, reflecting the newer manufacturing process.

Memory configurations differ significantly. The GeForce 930M has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 12.80 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro 2000 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 41.60 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro 2000's memory bandwidth is more than three times higher, which can be important for bandwidth-intensive workloads, though the GeForce 930M has twice the memory capacity.

Compute resources are distributed differently. The GeForce 930M has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units. The Quadro 2000 has 192 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. Despite having fewer shading units, the Quadro 2000 has more TMUs and ROPs, which contributes to its higher pixel rate of 5.000 GPixel/s and texture rate of 20.00 GTexel/s, compared to the GeForce 930M's 4.392 GPixel/s and 13.18 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute rating is 480.0 GFLOPS for the Quadro 2000 versus 421.6 GFLOPS for the GeForce 930M.

Clock behavior also differs. The GeForce 930M has a base clock of 549 MHz and a boost clock of 549 MHz, with memory running at 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective). The Quadro 2000 does not have recorded base or boost clocks in the database, but its memory runs at 650 MHz (2.6 Gbps effective).

The GeForce 930M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 33 W TDP, no power connectors, and a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface. The Quadro 2000 is a single-slot discrete card with a 62 W TDP, no power connectors, a suggested PSU of 250 W, and a PCIe 2.0 x16 bus interface. The Quadro 2000 measures 178 mm in length and 111 mm in height, with display outputs of 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort, while the GeForce 930M's display outputs are described as portable device dependent.

API support shows the newer architecture's advantage: the GeForce 930M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro 2000 also supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but has no recorded Vulkan support. The GeForce 930M was released on 2015-03-12, while the Quadro 2000 was released on 2010-12-23, a gap of over four years.

The Verdict

The recorded data indicates that the NVIDIA GeForce 930M is the stronger choice for general compute workloads, as shown by its 29.5% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL head-to-head test. Its higher average benchmark score (4388 versus 3898) and better percentile ranking (26th versus 23rd) reinforce this conclusion. The GeForce 930M also offers newer architecture, a more advanced process node, higher transistor density, and broader API support, including Vulkan.

The Quadro 2000 retains advantages in specific hardware characteristics: it has higher memory bandwidth (41.60 GB/s versus 12.80 GB/s), more texture units (32 versus 24), more ROPs (16 versus 8), and a higher FP32 compute rating (480.0 GFLOPS versus 421.6 GFLOPS). These characteristics could make it preferable for workloads that are sensitive to memory bandwidth or texture throughput, despite its lower overall compute score.

However, the only benchmark available in the head-to-head comparison shows the GeForce 930M winning decisively. Users who prioritize OpenCL performance, modern API support, or lower power consumption (33 W versus 62 W) should prefer the GeForce 930M. Users who need a single-slot discrete card with higher memory bandwidth, a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, or specific professional display outputs (DVI and DisplayPort) may find the Quadro 2000 more suitable for their hardware requirements.

The Quadro 2000 has a recorded launch MSRP of 599 USD. The GeForce 930M has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930M scores 5046, while the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 scores 3898, giving the GeForce 930M a 29.5% advantage in this benchmark.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for these GPUs?

A: The GeForce 930M has an average benchmark score of 4388, and the Quadro 2000 has an average benchmark score of 3898.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The GeForce 930M has 2 GB of DDR3 memory, while the Quadro 2000 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro 2000 has a memory bandwidth of 41.60 GB/s, which is significantly higher than the GeForce 930M's 12.80 GB/s.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The GeForce 930M also supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro 2000 has no recorded Vulkan support.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these GPUs?

A: The GeForce 930M has a TDP of 33 W, and the Quadro 2000 has a TDP of 62 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single recorded head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, where the NVIDIA GeForce 930M scores 5046 against the NVIDIA Quadro 2000's 3898. The delta of 29.5% represents a substantial performance gap, placing the GeForce 930M well ahead in this compute-oriented workload.

To contextualize this result, consider the nearest rival clusters for each GPU. The GeForce 930M's average score of 4388 places it just 0.5% behind the GeForce GT 645M (4411), 0.7% ahead of the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 (4360), 1.2% ahead of the GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 (4335), and 2.2% ahead of the AMD FirePro W2100 (4295). These differences are small, indicating that the GeForce 930M performs within a narrow band of comparable products.

The Quadro 2000's average score of 3898 sits 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics (3883), 0.5% behind the Quadro K2000D (3919), 0.8% behind the Quadro 2000D (3930), and 1.4% behind the GeForce GT 745M (3953). The Quadro 2000's performance cluster is roughly 400 to 500 points lower than the GeForce 930M's cluster, which aligns with the 29.5% head-to-head gap.

The GeForce 930M also records a Geekbench Vulkan score of 3729, a metric for which the Quadro 2000 has no recorded data. This further suggests that the newer Maxwell architecture is better equipped for modern graphics API workloads.

In terms of theoretical throughput, the Quadro 2000 posts higher pixel rate (5.000 GPixel/s versus 4.392 GPixel/s), texture rate (20.00 GTexel/s versus 13.18 GTexel/s), and FP32 compute (480.0 GFLOPS versus 421.6 GFLOPS). These figures reflect the Quadro 2000's higher clocked shader array and wider memory bus. Yet in the actual OpenCL test, the GeForce 930M outperforms it by a wide margin. This discrepancy may be attributed to architectural efficiency differences between Maxwell and Fermi, driver optimization, or the nature of the OpenCL workload itself.

The GeForce 930M's advantage in the head-to-head benchmark is decisive, and the broader average score data corroborates it. The Quadro 2000's higher memory bandwidth and fill rates do not translate into a benchmark win in the recorded test. For users relying on OpenCL performance, the GeForce 930M is the clear choice based on the available measurements.