GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M are two end-of-life Fermi-era GPUs that target entirely different segments of the market. The Quadro 2000D is a professional workstation card designed for desktop workstations, while the GT 635M is a mobile chip intended for laptops. Despite their shared architectural roots, the benchmark data reveals a clear performance hierarchy, with the Quadro 2000D holding a 5.1% lead in the only common test.

Where Each One Wins

The data is unambiguous: the Quadro 2000D wins the only head-to-head benchmark available. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Quadro 2000D scores 3930, while the GT 635M scores 3740. This 5.1% delta means the Quadro outperforms the GT 635M across the board in compute workloads. There are no benchmark categories where the GT 635M emerges victorious; the wins tally stands at 1 for the Quadro and 0 for the GT 635M.

The Quadro’s victory is not just about the raw score. Its OpenCL result places it at the 23rd percentile of all GPUs, whereas the GT 635M sits at the 22nd percentile. While both are near the bottom of the performance spectrum, the Quadro’s edge is consistent with its larger silicon and higher power envelope. The GT 635M, being a mobile part, clearly prioritizes efficiency over compute throughput, but this comes at a measurable performance cost.

For users, this means the Quadro 2000D is the choice for any task that leverages OpenCL acceleration, rendering, simulation, or data processing. The GT 635M, while functional for basic display and light 3D work, cannot match the Quadro’s compute density. The only area where the GT 635M implicitly "wins" is in its mobile form factor, but the benchmark data does not quantify that advantage.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on NVIDIA’s Fermi architecture and use TSMC’s 40 nm process node, but their internal configurations diverge sharply. The Quadro 2000D uses the GF106 chip, which packs 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 4.9M / mm². The GT 635M uses the smaller GF108 chip, with just 585 million transistors on a 116 mm² die, and a slightly higher density of 5.0M / mm². This means the Quadro has exactly twice the transistor count and double the die area, a structural advantage that dictates its higher performance.

The shading resources tell a similar story. The Quadro 2000D features 192 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster output units (ROPs). The GT 635M is cut down to 96 shading units, 16 TMUs, and only 4 ROPs. This halving of core resources directly explains the Quadro’s compute lead. The pixel rate is 5.000 GPixel/s for the Quadro versus 1.900 GPixel/s for the GT 635M, and the texture rate is 20.00 GTexel/s versus 7.600 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput is 480.0 GFLOPS for the Quadro, compared to 182.4 GFLOPS for the GT 635M, a 2.6x advantage.

Memory architecture also differs significantly. The Quadro 2000D uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 41.60 GB/s of bandwidth. The GT 635M has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on the same 128-bit bus, but only achieves 28.80 GB/s. The memory clock is 650 MHz (2.6 Gbps effective) on the Quadro versus 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) on the GT 635M. The Quadro’s faster GDDR5 memory provides a bandwidth advantage that matters in memory-bound workloads, even though the GT 635M has double the capacity.

The Verdict

The benchmark results dictate a straightforward verdict. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D is the superior GPU for compute performance, winning the only available test with a 5.1% margin. Its higher FP32 throughput, faster memory, and more robust core configuration make it the logical pick for professional applications that demand OpenCL acceleration. The GT 635M, while consuming less power at 35 W versus 62 W, cannot compensate for its reduced hardware resources.

The Quadro’s 5.1% lead over the GT 635M in the Geekbench OpenCL test is notable, but context matters. The Quadro’s nearest rivals include the Quadro K2000D (0.3% ahead), the GeForce GT 745M (0.6% behind), the Radeon R5 M420 (0.7% behind), and the GeForce 830M (0.7% behind). This cluster suggests that the Quadro is competitive with a broad range of low-end GPUs. The GT 635M sits near its own rivals: the Quadro 3000M (0.6% ahead), the GeForce GT 740M (0.6% ahead), the GeForce 825M (1.2% ahead), and the Intel UHD Graphics 710 (1.4% behind). The GT 635M is thus at the bottom of its peer group, trailing most comparable parts.

For a desktop workstation, the Quadro 2000D is the clear choice. For a laptop, the GT 635M is the only option of the two, but the data shows it is a weak performer even by mobile standards. The GT 635M’s 2 GB of memory is its only tangible advantage, but this does not translate into higher benchmark scores.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D scores 3930, which is 5.1% higher than the GeForce GT 635M’s 3740.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in terms of memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro 2000D has a bandwidth of 41.60 GB/s using GDDR5 memory, while the GT 635M has 28.80 GB/s using DDR3 memory.

Q: What are the core counts for each GPU?

A: The Quadro 2000D has 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GT 635M has 96 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 4 ROPs.

Q: Which GPU consumes more power?

A: The Quadro 2000D has a TDP of 62 W, while the GT 635M has a TDP of 35 W.

Q: Are both GPUs based on the same architecture?

A: Yes, both are based on the Fermi architecture and are manufactured on a 40 nm process by TSMC, but they use different chips (GF106 for the Quadro, GF108 for the GT 635M).

Q: How does the Quadro 2000D compare to its nearest rival, the Quadro K2000D?

A: The Quadro 2000D scores 3930, which is 0.3% higher than the Quadro K2000D’s average score of 3919.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole head-to-head benchmark is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it decisively favors the Quadro 2000D. The Quadro scores 3930, beating the GT 635M’s 3740 by a margin of 5.1%. This is a substantial gap for two GPUs that are ostensibly from the same architecture and generation. The delta is large enough to be noticeable in real-world OpenCL workloads, such as video encoding or physics simulations.

The Quadro’s win can be attributed to its hardware. With 192 shading units versus 96, the Quadro has exactly double the compute cores. Its FP32 throughput of 480.0 GFLOPS is more than 2.6 times the GT 635M’s 182.4 GFLOPS. The memory subsystem also contributes: the Quadro’s 41.60 GB/s bandwidth is 44% higher than the GT 635M’s 28.80 GB/s. These factors compound to produce the 5.1% score difference.

The GT 635M’s only counterargument is its 2 GB memory capacity, which is double the Quadro’s 1 GB. However, the benchmark data shows this capacity advantage does not help in compute tasks. The GT 635M’s memory is also slower in effective speed (1800 Mbps vs 2.6 Gbps), which further hampers its performance. The pixel rate difference is stark: 5.000 GPixel/s for the Quadro versus 1.900 GPixel/s for the GT 635M, indicating a 2.6x gap in fill-rate capabilities.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification, reflecting their divergent target markets. The Quadro 2000D uses the GF106 chip with 1,170 million transistors and a 238 mm² die, while the GT 635M uses the GF108 chip with 585 million transistors and a 116 mm² die. The transistor density is nearly identical (4.9M vs 5.0M per mm²), but the Quadro’s larger die provides more resources.

Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The Quadro has 1024 MB of GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and 41.60 GB/s bandwidth. The GT 635M has 2 GB of DDR3 with the same 128-bit bus but only 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clocks differ: 650 MHz (2.6 Gbps effective) for the Quadro versus 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) for the GT 635M.

The compute resources are roughly halved on the GT 635M. The Quadro has 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the GT 635M has 96 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. This leads to pixel rates of 5.000 GPixel/s versus 1.900 GPixel/s, and texture rates of 20.00 GTexel/s versus 7.600 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 480.0 GFLOPS versus 182.4 GFLOPS.

Power and physical differences are also notable. The Quadro has a TDP of 62 W and is a single-slot card measuring 178 mm in length, with 2x DVI outputs. The GT 635M has a TDP of 35 W and is integrated into a portable device (IGP), with display outputs that are "Portable Device Dependent". The Quadro suggests a 250 W PSU, while the GT 635M has no PSU suggestion. The Quadro was released on 2011-10-04 with a launch MSRP of 599 USD, while the GT 635M was released on 2012-03-21 with no launch MSRP. Both are end-of-life products with PCIe 2.0 x16 interfaces, and both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan support.