NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Quadro 2000 takes the only benchmark result in the database, and it does so decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro 2000 scores 3898 against the GeForce GT 545's 3594, a delta of 8.5 percent. That is not a marginal edge; it is a clear, measurable lead in raw compute throughput that places the Quadro 2000 in a higher performance tier.

Context matters here. The Quadro 2000's score of 3898 puts it just 0.4 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics (3883) and 0.5 percent behind the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D (3919). It sits in a tightly packed cluster of professional and mobile parts, all within 1.4 percent of each other. The GeForce GT 545, by contrast, scores 3594, which places it 0.1 percent behind the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation (3596) — an odd pairing of generations, but the data is what it is — and 1.5 percent behind the AMD Radeon HD 6770 (3649). The GT 545's percentile rank of 21 versus the Quadro 2000's 23 reinforces the gap: the Quadro 2000 outperforms a larger share of all GPUs in the database.

The 8.5 percent delta is the headline. The Quadro 2000 wins the compute test outright, and the win is consistent with its higher shading unit count and faster memory. There is no benchmark in the database where the GeForce GT 545 fights back. The wins column reads 1 for the Quadro 2000, 0 for the GeForce GT 545. That is the entire head-to-head story: one test, one winner, no ambiguity.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on TSMC's 40 nm process node, and both pack the same transistor count of 1,170 million on an identical 238 mm² die. The transistor density is therefore the same 4.9M per mm². The similarity ends at the foundry and process, because the underlying architectures diverge in name and in execution.

The Quadro 2000 uses the GF106 chip under the "Fermi" architecture, belonging to the Quadro Fermi (x000) generation. The GeForce GT 545 uses the GF116 chip under "Fermi 2.0," a refined iteration of the same family, and sits in the GeForce 500 generation. Fermi 2.0 is a revision, not a revolution, but the chip-level differences produce measurable performance characteristics.

Compute resources differ substantially. The Quadro 2000 fields 192 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The GeForce GT 545 has fewer of everything on the compute side: 144 shading units, 24 TMUs, but still 16 ROPs. That deficit in shading units and TMUs directly explains the GT 545's lower peak throughput figures. The Quadro 2000 reaches 480.0 GFLOPS FP32, while the GT 545 manages 414.7 GFLOPS — a 15.7 percent raw compute advantage for the Quadro 2000. Pixel rate follows suit: 5.000 GPixel/s versus 4.320 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 20.00 GTexel/s against 17.28 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture is where the two cards take opposite strategies. The Quadro 2000 uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 41.60 GB/s of bandwidth. The GeForce GT 545 uses 1536 MB of DDR3 on a wider 192-bit bus, but only achieves 38.40 GB/s. The Quadro 2000's GDDR5 memory runs at 650 MHz (2.6 Gbps effective), while the GT 545's DDR3 runs at 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective). The GDDR5 advantage in bandwidth per bit is evident: despite a narrower bus, the Quadro 2000 moves data faster. The GT 545 compensates with 50 percent more capacity, but capacity does not help the OpenCL score.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan support listed for either. The Quadro 2000 is a single-slot card measuring 178 mm (7 inches) long and 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall, requiring no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. The GeForce GT 545 is shorter at 145 mm (5.7 inches), also single-slot, also no power connectors, also 250 W suggested PSU. TDP differs slightly: 62 W for the Quadro 2000 versus 70 W for the GT 545. The Quadro 2000 is more power-efficient per compute unit, which is notable for a professional card.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the available benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 2000. It scores 3898 in Geekbench OpenCL, beating the GeForce GT 545's 3594 by 8.5 percent.

Q: Do both cards use the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes. Both are built on a 40 nm process at TSMC, with 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die.

Q: How does the memory configuration differ?

A: The Quadro 2000 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 41.60 GB/s bandwidth. The GeForce GT 545 has 1536 MB of DDR3 on a 192-bit bus but only 38.40 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The Quadro 2000 has 192 shading units, compared to 144 on the GeForce GT 545. The Quadro 2000 also has 32 TMUs versus 24 TMUs, while both have 16 ROPs.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Quadro 2000 has a TDP of 62 W, while the GeForce GT 545 has a TDP of 70 W. Both require a 250 W suggested PSU and no power connectors.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life. The Quadro 2000 was released on 2010-12-23, and the GeForce GT 545 on 2011-05-13.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro 2000 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 |

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

| Chip | GF106 | GF116 |

| Architecture | Fermi | Fermi 2.0 |

| Generation | Quadro Fermi (x000) | GeForce 500 |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | 1536 MB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Clock | 650 MHz (2.6 Gbps effective) | 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 41.60 GB/s | 38.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 192 | 144 |

| TMUs | 32 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 5.000 GPixel/s | 4.320 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 20.00 GTexel/s | 17.28 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 480.0 GFLOPS | 414.7 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 62 W | 70 W |

| Length | 178 mm (7 inches) | 145 mm (5.7 inches) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | Not listed |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, 1x VGA |

| Release Date | 2010-12-23 | 2011-05-13 |

| Predecessor | Quadro FX Tesla | GeForce 400 |

| Successor | Quadro Kepler | GeForce 600 |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | 149 USD |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 3898 | 3594 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 23 | 21 |

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro 2000 wins the only benchmark available, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by 8.5 percent. It also wins on every raw compute metric: FP32 (480.0 vs 414.7 GFLOPS), pixel rate (5.000 vs 4.320 GPixel/s), texture rate (20.00 vs 17.28 GTexel/s), and memory bandwidth (41.60 vs 38.40 GB/s). If the workload is compute-heavy, professional rendering, or GPGPU-style OpenCL, the Quadro 2000 is the clear pick. Its higher shading unit count (192 vs 144) and TMU count (32 vs 24) give it more parallel execution resources, and its GDDR5 memory moves data faster despite a narrower 128-bit bus. The lower TDP of 62 W is a bonus — it does more work while drawing less power than the GT 545's 70 W.

The GeForce GT 545 has exactly one concrete specification win: memory capacity. At 1536 MB versus 1024 MB, it holds 50 percent more data in local memory. This could matter for workloads that need larger framebuffers or bigger working sets, though the slower DDR3 memory (38.40 GB/s) and lower compute throughput limit its usefulness. It is also shorter physically (145 mm vs 178 mm), which helps in small cases, and it offers an HDMI 1.3a output and VGA output, whereas the Quadro 2000 offers dual DisplayPort outputs. The GT 545's display output set is more consumer-oriented, with VGA for legacy monitors and HDMI for TVs. The Quadro 2000's dual DisplayPort is aimed at professional multi-monitor setups.

The GT 545 also launched at 149 USD, but the Quadro 2000 launched at 599 USD. The release dates differ by roughly five months, with the GT 545 arriving later. None of that changes the benchmark outcome. In every measurable performance metric in the fact pack, the Quadro 2000 leads.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000 outperforms the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 in the single available benchmark by 8.5 percent, and it leads across every compute and memory throughput metric. For any task that stresses OpenCL compute, floating-point throughput, or texture/pixel fill rates, the Quadro 2000 is the superior card. Its 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and GDDR5 memory with 41.60 GB/s bandwidth form a more capable compute package than the GT 545's 144 shading units, 24 TMUs, and DDR3 memory at 38.40 GB/s.

The GeForce GT 545 is not without merit, but its merits are narrow. The larger 1536 MB memory pool could benefit workloads with large data sets that fit in VRAM, and the HDMI/VGA output options suit consumer displays. The shorter 145 mm length and the 149 USD launch MSRP make it a more accessible physical and fiscal product. But the benchmark result — 3594 versus 3898 — puts it behind in the only head-to-head comparison available, and its 21st percentile rank versus the Quadro 2000's 23rd percentile confirms it sits lower in the overall GPU landscape.

Professional buyers should choose the Quadro 2000. It is the faster card, the more efficient card (62 W TDP versus 70 W), and the one with the higher performance percentile. Its dual DisplayPort outputs align with professional multi-display workflows. The 599 USD launch MSRP reflects a workstation-class product, and the performance data justifies that positioning.

Consumer buyers with compute needs should also choose the Quadro 2000, provided the single DVI plus dual DisplayPort output set works with their display. The GT 545's only advantages — memory capacity and legacy display outputs — do not translate into benchmark wins. The Quadro 2000 wins the test that matters, and it wins it by 8.5 percent.

There is no scenario in the data where the GeForce GT 545 wins a performance comparison. It is the slower card, with fewer compute resources, lower bandwidth, and a lower benchmark score. The verdict is straightforward: the Quadro 2000 is the better GPU.