NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 vs NVIDIA Quadro M2000M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits sharply between these two NVIDIA offerings. The GeForce GTX 1080 wins every shared test, and in the two head-to-head benchmarks where both cards have recorded scores, the margin is enormous. The GeForce GTX 1080 leads in Geekbench OpenCL with 51,204 points versus 10,057 points, a 409.1% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 1080 scores 30,398 against 9,606, a 216.4% difference. There is no workload category in the database where the Quadro M2000M comes out ahead.

The GTX 1080 also holds a substantial lead in average benchmark score. Its average sits at 11,960, while the Quadro M2000M averages 9,832. That places the GTX 1080 at the 51st percentile of all GPUs in the database, whereas the Quadro M2000M sits at the 47th percentile. The delta between the two cards' average scores is roughly 21.6%, which understates the gap seen in individual compute tests because the GTX 1080 has a much wider benchmark profile recorded, including older DirectX tests where its scores are relatively modest.

Looking at the GTX 1080's nearest rivals by average score, the data shows a tight cluster. The GeForce GTX 960A is essentially tied at 11,998 with a -0.3% delta, the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT is 1% behind, the GeForce GTX 1660 trails by 2.4%, and the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT sits 2.9% behind. This indicates that the GTX 1080's average performance is well-anchored in its performance class, despite its individual compute wins being far more decisive.

For the Quadro M2000M, its nearest rivals tell a different story. The NVIDIA Quadro 6000 is essentially identical at 9,846 with a -0.1% delta, the AMD FirePro W5000 is 0.3% ahead, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 is 0.5% ahead, and the NVIDIA Tesla M10 is 1.1% ahead. The M2000M is clearly positioned in a much lower performance tier, competing with older professional and mid-range parts rather than anything near the GTX 1080's class.

The use-case split is therefore unambiguous. The GeForce GTX 1080 is the choice for any compute-heavy workload, particularly OpenCL and Vulkan applications where its scores are multiples of the M2000M's. The Quadro M2000M, with its lower power envelope and mobile form factor, would only be relevant in scenarios where the GTX 1080 cannot physically fit or where its power draw is prohibitive, but the benchmark data offers no performance scenario where the M2000M wins.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and are built on different process nodes. The GeForce GTX 1080 uses the GP104 chip based on the Pascal architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 16 nm process. The Quadro M2000M uses the GM107 chip based on the older Maxwell architecture, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process. This process difference is significant: the GTX 1080 packs 7,200 million transistors into a 314 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 22.9 million transistors per mm². The M2000M contains 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, for a density of 12.6 million per mm².

The compute resources differ by a factor of four in several key areas. The GTX 1080 has 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The M2000M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This is exactly a 4x difference in each category. Clock speeds also favor the GTX 1080: its base clock is 1,607 MHz with a boost of 1,733 MHz, while the M2000M runs at 1,098 MHz base and 1,137 MHz boost.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The GTX 1080 uses 8 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, achieving 320.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The M2000M has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock difference is modest in raw terms (1,251 MHz versus 1,253 MHz), but the effective data rate tells the real story: 10 Gbps for the GTX 1080 versus 5 Gbps for the M2000M. The GTX 1080's memory subsystem delivers exactly four times the bandwidth.

Power and form factor differences are stark. The GTX 1080 has a 180 W TDP, is a dual-slot card, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and needs a 450 W suggested PSU. It is 267 mm long, 112 mm tall, and 40 mm wide. The M2000M is an MXM module with a 55 W TDP, no power connectors, and dimensions that are not recorded in the database. Its bus interface is MXM-A (3.0), whereas the GTX 1080 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

API support shows a subtle difference. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the DirectX versions differ. The GTX 1080 supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1, while the M2000M supports DirectX 12 with feature level 11_0. This means the GTX 1080 can utilize more advanced DirectX 12 features. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores.

The GTX 1080 also has a much richer display output configuration: one DVI port, one HDMI 2.0, and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The M2000M's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its mobile workstation origin.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the GeForce GTX 1080 in OpenCL compute?

A: The GTX 1080 scores 51,204 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 10,057 for the Quadro M2000M, a 409.1% advantage.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The GTX 1080 has an average benchmark score of 11,960, while the M2000M averages 9,832. This places the GTX 1080 at the 51st percentile of all GPUs and the M2000M at the 47th percentile.

Q: Are these cards from the same architecture generation?

A: No. The GTX 1080 uses the Pascal architecture on a 16 nm process with the GP104 chip. The M2000M uses the Maxwell architecture on a 28 nm process with the GM107 chip.

Q: How do memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The GTX 1080 achieves 320.3 GB/s with 8 GB of GDDR5X on a 256-bit bus. The M2000M has 80.19 GB/s with 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The GTX 1080 has exactly four times the bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: Both support DirectX 12, but at different feature levels. The GTX 1080 supports feature level 12_1, while the M2000M is limited to feature level 11_0.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The GTX 1080 has a 180 W TDP and requires a single 8-pin power connector with a 450 W suggested PSU. The M2000M has a 55 W TDP, uses no power connectors, and is an MXM module.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 | NVIDIA Quadro M2000M |

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

| Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell |

| Process Node | 16 nm | 28 nm |

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

| Die Size | 314 mm² | 148 mm² |

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

| Base Clock | 1607 MHz | 1098 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1733 MHz | 1137 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1251 MHz, 10 Gbps effective | 1253 MHz, 5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5X | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 320.3 GB/s | 80.19 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2560 | 640 |

| TMUs | 160 | 40 |

| ROPs | 64 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 110.9 GPixel/s | 18.19 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 277.3 GTexel/s | 45.48 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 8.873 TFLOPS | 1,455.4 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 138.6 GFLOPS (1:64) | Not recorded |

| TDP | 180 W | 55 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | MXM Module |

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

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | Not recorded |

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

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

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | 267 mm x 112 mm x 40 mm | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2016-05-26 | 2015-12-02 |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | Not recorded |

The specification table shows that the GTX 1080 leads in every measured performance parameter. The FP32 throughput difference is notable: 8.873 TFLOPS versus 1,455.4 GFLOPS, a factor of roughly 6.1x. Pixel rate and texture rate show similar gaps, with the GTX 1080 at 110.9 GPixel/s and 277.3 GTexel/s against 18.19 GPixel/s and 45.48 GTexel/s respectively.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two shared benchmarks between these GPUs, and both are decisive wins for the GeForce GTX 1080.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1080 scores 51,204 points. The Quadro M2000M manages 10,057 points. The delta is 409.1%, meaning the GTX 1080 delivers roughly five times the OpenCL performance. OpenCL is a common compute API used across many professional and scientific workloads, so this gap has practical implications for any GPU-accelerated application that relies on OpenCL.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 1080 scores 30,398 points against 9,606 points for the M2000M. The delta is 216.4%, meaning the GTX 1080 is more than three times faster in Vulkan compute. Vulkan is a lower-overhead API, and the GTX 1080's architectural advantages in shading units, memory bandwidth, and clock speed all contribute to this result.

The wins tally is 2 for the GTX 1080 and 0 for the M2000M. There are no recorded benchmarks where the M2000M wins. The lack of additional shared benchmarks means the database cannot compare these cards in DirectX or older graphics workloads, but the two compute tests that do exist are enough to establish a clear performance hierarchy.

The GTX 1080's own benchmark portfolio shows a broader range of results. Its Passmark scores include 93 in DirectX 10, 124 in DirectX 11, 55 in DirectX 12, 211 in DirectX 9, 888 in G2D, 15,586 in G3D, and 7,614 in GPU compute. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1,560, and Geekbench Metal shows 23,824. The M2000M has only the two Geekbench results recorded. This asymmetry in benchmark coverage means the average score comparison (11,960 versus 9,832) is based on different test sets, but the head-to-head results are directly comparable.

Looking at the GTX 1080's nearest rivals in the database, its average score of 11,960 sits within 3% of four other GPUs. The GeForce GTX 960A at 11,998 is nearly identical, and the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT at 11,842 is 1% behind. The GeForce GTX 1660 at 11,680 is 2.4% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT at 11,627 is 2.9% behind. This clustering suggests that while the GTX 1080's absolute performance is strong, its average score is representative of a specific performance tier rather than being an outlier.

For the Quadro M2000M, its nearest rivals are all within 1.1% of its 9,832 average. The Quadro 6000 at 9,846 is effectively tied, the FirePro W5000 at 9,803 is 0.3% ahead, the GeForce GTX 1070 at 9,780 is 0.5% ahead, and the Tesla M10 at 9,724 is 1.1% ahead. This tight grouping places the M2000M in a performance class that is well below the GTX 1080's tier, with roughly 18% separating the two cards' average scores.

The data indicates that the GeForce GTX 1080 is the superior product in every measurable way. Its compute performance in OpenCL and Vulkan is multiples of the M2000M's, its memory bandwidth is four times higher, and its shading resources are four times greater. The Quadro M2000M's only advantages are its lower power draw and compact MXM form factor, which are relevant for specific mobile workstation designs but do not translate into any benchmark wins.