NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M and the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 comes from the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is decisive. The Quadro 2000 scores 3898, while the GT 645M trails at 2680, a 31.2% deficit for the mobile GeForce part. This is not a narrow margin; it is a commanding lead for the workstation-oriented Fermi card in compute workloads measured through OpenCL.

Looking at the broader database context, the GT 645M has three recorded benchmark results across different APIs: Geekbench Metal at 5679, Geekbench OpenCL at 2680, and Geekbench Vulkan at 4875. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 4411, placing it in the 26th percentile of all GPUs. The Quadro 2000, by contrast, has only a single recorded result, the same Geekbench OpenCL test, and its average equals that score at 3898, putting it in the 23rd percentile. Despite the lower percentile ranking, the Quadro 2000 wins the only apples-to-apples comparison available.

The delta between the two in OpenCL is substantial enough to define the entire head-to-head picture. The GT 645M's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce 930M at 4388 (0.5% ahead), the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 at 4360 (1.2% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 at 4335 (1.8% ahead), with the AMD Radeon R7 M260 slightly ahead at 4499. The Quadro 2000's nearest rivals are all within a very tight band: the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics at 3883 (0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D at 3919 (0.5% behind), the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D at 3930 (0.8% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M at 3953 (1.4% behind). This shows the Quadro 2000 sits in a dense cluster of similar-performance parts, while the GT 645M's OpenCL score is an outlier far below its own average.

What makes this interesting is that the GT 645M's average score of 4411 is actually higher than the Quadro 2000's 3898, but that average is pulled up by its Vulkan and Metal results, which have no corresponding Quadro 2000 data point. In the only shared test, the Quadro 2000 wins outright, and the margin is large enough that no reasonable interpretation of the data flips the outcome.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and are built on different manufacturing processes. The GeForce GT 645M uses the GK107 chip, which is part of the Kepler architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The Quadro 2000 uses the GF106 chip, based on the older Fermi architecture, also from TSMC but on a 40 nm process. This process gap matters: the Kepler part packs 1,270 million transistors into a 118 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 10.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The Fermi part contains 1,170 million transistors spread across a much larger 238 mm² die, for a density of only 4.9 million per square millimeter.

The Kepler chip's advantage in density does not translate into a compute win in OpenCL, as the head-to-head result shows. The GT 645M has 384 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The Quadro 2000 has 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. So the GT 645M fields twice the shading units and identical TMU and ROP counts, yet loses the compute benchmark by 31.2%. This indicates architectural efficiency differences: Fermi's per-shader throughput in this workload outpaces Kepler's wider but less efficient arrangement.

Clock behavior also differs. The GT 645M has a base clock of 709 MHz and a boost clock of 780 MHz, while the Quadro 2000 has no listed base or boost clocks in the database. Memory clocks differ as well: the GT 645M's memory runs at 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective, while the Quadro 2000's memory runs at 650 MHz with 2.6 Gbps effective. The Quadro 2000's memory is GDDR5, whereas the GT 645M uses DDR3, and this contributes to a significant bandwidth advantage for the Quadro 2000 despite its lower memory clock: 41.60 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s.

The API support also diverges. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The GT 645M adds Vulkan 1.2.175 support, while the Quadro 2000 has no Vulkan entry in the database. This is a notable feature split, as the GT 645M's Vulkan result of 4875 demonstrates the API is functional and performant on Kepler hardware.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro 2000 wins the only directly comparable workload, Geekbench OpenCL, by a wide margin. This makes it the clear choice for OpenCL-centric compute tasks where the two overlap. Its GDDR5 memory and higher bandwidth (41.60 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s) likely play a role in this outcome, as memory-bound compute kernels benefit from the extra 12.80 GB/s of throughput. The Quadro 2000 also carries a workstation pedigree, with a single-slot form factor, dual DisplayPort outputs plus one DVI port, and a suggested 250 W power supply, features aimed at professional environments.

The GT 645M, however, wins in the broader benchmark picture. Its average score of 4411 is 13.2% higher than the Quadro 2000's 3898, driven by strong Vulkan and Metal results. For users running those APIs, the GT 645M is the better performer. It also draws far less power: 32 W versus 62 W, which is a meaningful efficiency advantage. The GT 645M supports Vulkan, which the Quadro 2000 does not, and it has double the memory capacity at 2 GB versus 1024 MB, which helps in texture-heavy or larger dataset workloads. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface offers more bandwidth than the Quadro 2000's PCIe 2.0 x16.

The GT 645M is also the newer part, released later in the database's timeline, and it belongs to a different product generation, the GeForce 600M series, whereas the Quadro 2000 comes from the Quadro Fermi line. The GT 645M's IGP slot width indicates it is designed for integration into portable devices, while the Quadro 2000 is a discrete single-slot card with a 178 mm length and 111 mm height.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category. The GT 645M uses the GK107 chip on a 28 nm process, while the Quadro 2000 uses the GF106 chip on a 40 nm process. Transistor counts are close, 1,270 million versus 1,170 million, but die size diverges sharply: 118 mm² versus 238 mm². Transistor density is 10.8 million per square millimeter on the GT 645M versus 4.9 million on the Quadro 2000.

The GT 645M has a base clock of 709 MHz and a boost clock of 780 MHz; the Quadro 2000 has no clock entries. Memory configurations differ in capacity, type, and bandwidth: the GT 645M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, while the Quadro 2000 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 41.60 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clock is 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) for the GT 645M versus 650 MHz (2.6 Gbps effective) for the Quadro 2000.

Shading unit counts differ: 384 on the GT 645M versus 192 on the Quadro 2000. TMU and ROP counts are identical at 32 and 16 respectively. Pixel rate is 6.240 GPixel/s for the GT 645M versus 5.000 GPixel/s for the Quadro 2000. Texture rate is 24.96 GTexel/s versus 20.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 599.0 GFLOPS for the GT 645M versus 480.0 GFLOPS for the Quadro 2000.

Power and physical specs diverge: the GT 645M has a 32 W TDP and an IGP slot width, while the Quadro 2000 has a 62 W TDP and a single-slot design. The GT 645M has no power connectors and no suggested PSU, while the Quadro 2000 also has no power connectors but lists a 250 W suggested PSU. Bus interfaces differ: PCIe 3.0 x16 for the GT 645M versus PCIe 2.0 x16 for the Quadro 2000. Display outputs are portable-device dependent on the GT 645M, while the Quadro 2000 offers 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort. The Quadro 2000 has physical dimensions of 178 mm length and 111 mm height; the GT 645M has none listed. Vulkan support exists only on the GT 645M (1.2.175), while both share DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only shared benchmark between the two?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 2000 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 3898, beating the GT 645M's 2680 by 31.2%.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The GT 645M has a higher average benchmark score of 4411, which includes Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan results, while the Quadro 2000's average is 3898 from its single OpenCL result.

Q: What are the memory differences between the two cards?

A: The GT 645M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, while the Quadro 2000 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 41.60 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the Quadro 2000 support Vulkan?

A: No, the database lists no Vulkan support for the Quadro 2000. The GT 645M supports Vulkan 1.2.175 and scores 4875 in the Geekbench Vulkan test.

Q: How do their power requirements differ?

A: The GT 645M has a 32 W TDP with no power connectors, while the Quadro 2000 has a 62 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: Which card has more shading units, and does it win the compute benchmark?

A: The GT 645M has 384 shading units versus 192 on the Quadro 2000, but the Quadro 2000 still wins the OpenCL benchmark by 31.2%.