NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 vs NVIDIA Quadro M2000M Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro M2000M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 occupy the same 47th percentile in the benchmark database, yet they represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Quadro is a mobile workstation part built for stability, while the GTX 1070 is a desktop enthusiast card built for raw throughput. In the two shared benchmarks, the GTX 1070 wins decisively, but the M2000M is not without its own merits for specific professional use cases. This analysis breaks down the architectural gap, the performance delta, and the specification differences that define these two end-of-life GPUs.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous regarding raw performance: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 is the superior choice for anyone prioritizing compute power. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 1070 scores 44,700 against the M2000M’s 10,057, a 77.5% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 1070 posts 22,121 versus 9,606, a 56.6% advantage. If the task involves heavy rendering, simulation, or any workload that scales with shading units and memory bandwidth, the GTX 1070 is the only rational pick from these two.

However, the Quadro M2000M is not a failed product; it is a different product. Its 55 W TDP and MXM module form factor make it suitable for mobile workstations where power and space are constrained. The GTX 1070, with a 150 W TDP and a dual-slot, 267 mm length, demands a desktop chassis with a 450 W suggested PSU. For a laptop-based professional who needs CUDA acceleration and certified driver stability in a portable package, the M2000M’s benchmark scores, while lower, may still be sufficient for lighter workloads. The GTX 1070 is for desktop users who want maximum performance and have the physical and electrical headroom to accommodate it. There is no middle ground; the choice is dictated by the platform.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are separated by a full architecture generation. The Quadro M2000M is built on the Maxwell architecture using the GM107 chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The GTX 1070 uses the Pascal architecture with the GP104 chip, manufactured on a 16 nm process, also at TSMC. This node shrink is the primary driver of the performance gulf, allowing the GTX 1070 to pack 7,200 million transistors into a 314 mm² die, compared to the M2000M’s 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die. The transistor density tells the story: the GTX 1070 achieves 22.9M transistors per mm², versus the M2000M’s 12.6M per mm².

The core configurations diverge sharply. The M2000M features 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 1070 triples the shading units to 1,920, triples the TMUs to 120, and quadruples the ROPs to 64. This is not an incremental upgrade; it is a structural overhaul. The GTX 1070 also supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the M2000M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) — a feature-level difference that affects advanced rendering techniques. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the underlying hardware capabilities are in different leagues.

Memory architecture also differs fundamentally. The M2000M uses a 128-bit memory bus with 4 GB of GDDR5, delivering 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 1070 doubles the bus width to 256-bit and the capacity to 8 GB, with GDDR5 memory rated at 256.3 GB/s. The GTX 1070’s memory clock is 2002 MHz (8 Gbps effective), while the M2000M runs at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). For texture-heavy or large-dataset workloads, the GTX 1070’s bandwidth advantage is decisive.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only two shared benchmarks exist in the data, and both are landslide victories for the GTX 1070. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1070 scores 44,700, which is 77.5% higher than the M2000M’s 10,057. This is the most direct measure of general-purpose compute throughput, and the margin reflects the GTX 1070’s 6.463 TFLOPS of FP32 performance against the M2000M’s 1,455.4 GFLOPS — a 4.4x raw compute advantage. The M2000M’s average benchmark score across all tests is 9,832, while the GTX 1070’s is 9,780, but this average is skewed by the GTX 1070’s broader test suite, which includes lower-scoring DirectX legacy tests.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 1070 posts 22,121 versus the M2000M’s 9,606, a 56.6% lead. Vulkan is a low-level API that benefits from raw geometry throughput and memory bandwidth, both of which favor the Pascal part. The M2000M’s pixel rate of 18.19 GPixel/s and texture rate of 45.48 GTexel/s are dwarfed by the GTX 1070’s 107.7 GPixel/s and 202.0 GTexel/s. There is no benchmark in the shared set where the M2000M wins; the closest rival comparison for the M2000M is the NVIDIA Quadro 6000, which scores 9,846 (a mere 0.1% delta), indicating the M2000M sits at the top of its own professional mobile segment but cannot compete with desktop Pascal.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro M2000M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 |

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

| Architecture | Maxwell | Pascal |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 16 nm |

| Transistors | 1,870 million | 7,200 million |

| Die Size | 148 mm² | 314 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 22.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1098 MHz | 1506 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1137 MHz | 1683 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 2002 MHz (8 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 80.19 GB/s | 256.3 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 1,920 |

| TMUs | 40 | 120 |

| ROPs | 16 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 18.19 GPixel/s | 107.7 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 45.48 GTexel/s | 202.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1,455.4 GFLOPS | 6.463 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | N/A | 101.0 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | 55 W | 150 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | N/A | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| Release Date | 2015-12-02 | 2016-06-09 |

| Dimensions | N/A | 267 mm x 112 mm x 40 mm |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | 379 USD |

The GTX 1070 also has a distinct feature set: its FP16 throughput is listed as 101.0 GFLOPS at a 1:64 ratio, indicating limited half-precision support, whereas the M2000M has no FP16 data. The GTX 1070’s display outputs include dual-link DVI, HDMI 2.0, and three DisplayPort 1.4a connectors, while the M2000M’s outputs are dependent on the portable device it is installed into. The M2000M requires no external power connector, drawing all power from the MXM slot, while the GTX 1070 needs a single 8-pin PCIe power connector.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance in shared benchmarks?

A: The GTX 1070 wins both shared tests decisively: 44,700 vs 10,057 in Geekbench OpenCL (77.5% lead) and 22,121 vs 9,606 in Geekbench Vulkan (56.6% lead).

Q: Are these two GPUs comparable in average benchmark scores?

A: Their average benchmark scores are very close (M2000M: 9,832; GTX 1070: 9,780), but this is misleading because the GTX 1070 has a wider test suite that includes lower-scoring legacy DirectX tests.

Q: What is the primary architectural difference between them?

A: The M2000M uses the Maxwell architecture on a 28 nm node with 1,870 million transistors, while the GTX 1070 uses Pascal on a 16 nm node with 7,200 million transistors — a 16 nm process allows nearly 4x the transistor count.

Q: Can the Quadro M2000M be installed in a desktop?

A: No, the M2000M uses an MXM-A (3.0) bus interface and an MXM Module slot width, with power and display outputs dependent on the host portable device. The GTX 1070 uses a standard PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.

Q: How do memory capacities and bandwidth compare?

A: The M2000M has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth; the GTX 1070 has 8 GB on a 256-bit bus with 256.3 GB/s bandwidth — a 3.2x bandwidth advantage for the latter.

Q: Which card has higher power requirements?

A: The GTX 1070 has a 150 W TDP, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 450 W PSU. The M2000M has a 55 W TDP and requires no external power connector, drawing everything from the MXM slot.