NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M vs NVIDIA Quadro K2000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K2000 and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M are both built on the same GK107 Kepler chip, but they target entirely different use cases. The data shows the Quadro K2000 is the stronger compute performer in most legacy API workloads, while the GeForce GT 745M holds a surprising lead in one modern graphics test. For a builder choosing between these two end-of-life parts, the decision comes down to whether you need raw throughput for professional applications or a specific API advantage for newer titles. The Quadro K2000 wins the head-to-head with 2 out of 3 benchmark victories, but the GeForce GT 745M is not without its merits. The Quadro K2000 is the pick for compute-heavy tasks and professional workflows, while the GeForce GT 745M is the better choice for Vulkan-based gaming scenarios.

The Verdict

The benchmark data paints a clear picture for most use cases. The NVIDIA Quadro K2000 is the dominant performer in two of the three head-to-head tests, winning Geekbench Metal by a substantial 30.7% margin and Geekbench OpenCL by 13.7%. Its average benchmark score of 3964 places it slightly ahead of the GeForce GT 745M's 3953, with a deltaPct of 0.3%. This is a narrow overall lead, but the individual test results show a significant split in performance characteristics.

The GeForce GT 745M wins only the Geekbench Vulkan test, but it wins it decisively. The 5502 score against the Quadro K2000's 4191 represents a -23.8% deltaPct (from the Quadro's perspective), meaning the GT 745M is roughly 31% faster in Vulkan. This is a major advantage for modern games and applications that leverage the Vulkan API. The GeForce GT 745M also has a lower TDP of 45 W compared to the Quadro K2000's 51 W, making it a more power-efficient option for mobile platforms.

For a professional workstation or a desktop system running OpenCL or Metal workloads, the Quadro K2000 is the clear choice. Its higher pixel rate of 7.632 GPixel/s versus 4.392 GPixel/s and texture rate of 30.53 GTexel/s versus 17.57 GTexel/s indicate stronger raw throughput. The data shows the Quadro K2000 also has a better percentile ranking at 24% versus 23% for the GT 745M, though both sit near the bottom of the performance spectrum. For a gaming laptop or a system targeting Vulkan-based titles, the GeForce GT 745M offers the better experience despite losing the overall benchmark count.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2000 has an average benchmark score of 3964, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M scores 3953. The deltaPct between them is 0.3%, favoring the Quadro K2000.

Q: How much faster is the Quadro K2000 in OpenCL?

A: The Quadro K2000 scores 4071 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to the GeForce GT 745M's 3580. This represents a 13.7% advantage for the Quadro K2000.

Q: Is the GeForce GT 745M better in any benchmark?

A: Yes, the GeForce GT 745M wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 5502, versus 4191 for the Quadro K2000. The deltaPct is -23.8% from the Quadro's perspective, indicating a substantial Vulkan lead for the GT 745M.

Q: What is the difference in thermal design power (TDP)?

A: The Quadro K2000 has a TDP of 51 W, while the GeForce GT 745M has a TDP of 45 W. The GT 745M is more power-efficient by 6 W.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both the Quadro K2000 and the GeForce GT 745M feature 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth and 1000 MHz memory clock (4 Gbps effective).

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Quadro K2000 has a pixel rate of 7.632 GPixel/s, significantly higher than the GeForce GT 745M's 4.392 GPixel/s. This indicates the Quadro can fill pixels nearly 74% faster.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same fundamental architecture, but they are positioned differently within NVIDIA's product stack. The Quadro K2000 belongs to the Quadro Kepler (Kx000) generation, while the GeForce GT 745M is part of the GeForce 700M series. Both use the GK107 chip, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die. The transistor density is identical at 10.8M / mm².

The key architectural difference lies in their intended roles. The Quadro K2000 is a professional workstation card, as evidenced by its single-slot design, 202 mm length, and 111 mm height. It features display outputs of 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2, making it suitable for multi-monitor professional setups. The GeForce GT 745M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) for laptops, with no fixed dimensions and display outputs that are "Portable Device Dependent." This means the Quadro is designed for desktop workstations, while the GT 745M is integrated into mobile platforms.

The bus interface differs as well. The Quadro K2000 uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the GeForce GT 745M uses the newer PCIe 3.0 x16. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175, so API support is identical. The production status is end-of-life for both, with the Quadro K2000 releasing slightly earlier on 2013-02-28, followed by the GT 745M on 2013-03-31. The Quadro K2000 has a launch MSRP of 599 USD, while the GT 745M has no listed launch MSRP.

Specification Differences

The most telling specification differences between these two GPUs are the compute rates and power consumption. The Quadro K2000 delivers 732.7 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the GeForce GT 745M delivers only 421.6 GFLOPS. This is a massive gap in raw compute capability, with the Quadro being 73.8% more powerful in FP32 throughput.

The texture fill rates follow the same pattern. The Quadro K2000 achieves 30.53 GTexel/s, while the GT 745M manages only 17.57 GTexel/s. The pixel rates diverge even further: 7.632 GPixel/s versus 4.392 GPixel/s. These differences are notable because both cards have identical shading unit counts (384), TMU counts (32), and ROP counts (16). The performance gap must therefore come from clock speeds or internal scheduling differences, though the FACT PACK does not list base or boost clocks for either card.

The memory subsystems are completely identical: 2 GB GDDR5, 128-bit bus, 64.00 GB/s bandwidth, and 1000 MHz memory clock. The power profiles differ, with the Quadro K2000 rated at 51 W TDP and the GT 745M at 45 W TDP. The Quadro requires a suggested PSU of 250 W and has no power connectors, while the GT 745M has no listed power connector or suggested PSU requirements. The Quadro K2000 is a single-slot card, while the GT 745M is an IGP with no slot width.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark results reveal a clear split between legacy and modern API workloads. In Geekbench Metal, the Quadro K2000 scores 3630 against the GT 745M's 2777, winning by 30.7%. This is the largest margin of victory in either direction, showing a strong advantage for the Quadro in Apple's Metal API. The Geekbench OpenCL test shows a similar but smaller gap: the Quadro K2000 scores 4071, while the GT 745M scores 3580, a 13.7% win for the Quadro.

The Geekbench Vulkan test flips the script entirely. The GeForce GT 745M scores 5502, dramatically outpacing the Quadro K2000's 4191. The deltaPct of -23.8% (from the Quadro's perspective) means the GT 745M is approximately 31% faster in Vulkan. This is a significant reversal, especially considering the Quadro's superior theoretical compute rates. In Vulkan, the GT 745M's efficiency shines through despite its lower FP32 and texture rates.

The overall benchmark totals show 2 wins for the Quadro K2000 and 1 win for the GeForce GT 745M. The average benchmark scores are close: 3964 for the Quadro and 3953 for the GT 745M, a 0.3% difference. The nearest rivals for the Quadro K2000 include the NVIDIA GeForce 830M (3957, 0.2% delta), AMD Radeon R5 M420 (3956, 0.2% delta), and the GT 745M itself (3953, 0.3% delta). For the GT 745M, its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R5 M420 (3956, -0.1% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce 830M (3957, -0.1% delta), alongside the Quadro K2000 (3964, -0.3% delta).

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro K2000 is the clear winner in compute-heavy and professional workloads. Its 30.7% lead in Metal and 13.7% lead in OpenCL make it the superior choice for applications that rely on these APIs, such as CAD, video editing, and scientific computing. The higher pixel rate of 7.632 GPixel/s and texture rate of 30.53 GTexel/s mean it can handle more demanding rendering tasks with greater detail and higher resolutions. The Quadro K2000's single-slot design and display outputs of 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 make it suitable for multi-monitor professional setups. Its 51 W TDP is modest for a desktop card, and the 250 W suggested PSU ensures easy integration into most workstations.

The GeForce GT 745M wins in Vulkan-based scenarios. Its 5502 score in Geekbench Vulkan is a substantial 31% higher than the Quadro K2000's 4191. This makes it the better choice for modern games and applications that leverage the Vulkan API, which is increasingly common in newer titles and emulators. The GT 745M's lower 45 W TDP also makes it more suitable for thin-and-light laptops, where power efficiency is paramount. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface provides double the bandwidth of the Quadro's PCIe 2.0 x16, which can help in data-transfer-heavy workloads. The GT 745M's status as an IGP means it takes up no expansion slot, making it ideal for compact mobile designs.

In practical terms, the choice is straightforward. If you are building a desktop workstation for professional applications using OpenCL or Metal, the Quadro K2000 is the superior GPU. If you are selecting a laptop for Vulkan-based gaming or need a low-power integrated solution, the GeForce GT 745M is the better pick. The data shows the Quadro K2000 is the more capable overall performer, but the GeForce GT 745M's Vulkan advantage is too significant to ignore for modern graphics workloads.