NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti vs NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Comparison

The benchmark data positions the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 as a decisively stronger performer than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti, with a generational leap in architecture and compute capability that results in a 251.2% lead in the only shared test. While the GTX 550 Ti retains historical significance as an early Fermi design, the P2000’s Pascal architecture, higher memory capacity, and superior raw throughput make it the clear choice for any modern workload.

FAQ

Q: What is the performance difference between the Quadro P2000 and the GTX 550 Ti?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, the Quadro P2000 scores 20125, while the GTX 550 Ti scores 5731. This gives the P2000 a 251.2% performance advantage, making it roughly 3.5 times faster in this compute-oriented test.

Q: Which GPU has better memory specifications?

A: The Quadro P2000 has 5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 160-bit bus, providing 140.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 550 Ti has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 98.50 GB/s. The P2000 offers significantly more capacity, though the GTX 550 Ti has a wider memory bus.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Quadro P2000 has a TDP of 75 W and requires no power connectors, with a suggested power supply of 250 W. The GTX 550 Ti has a 116 W TDP, needs one 6-pin power connector, and suggests a 300 W power supply. The P2000 is far more power-efficient.

Q: What are the architectural differences between the two?

A: The Quadro P2000 uses the Pascal architecture on a 16 nm process with 4,400 million transistors, while the GTX 550 Ti uses the Fermi 2.0 architecture on a 40 nm process with 1,170 million transistors. The P2000 is built on a much more modern and dense manufacturing node.

Q: Which GPU has better API support?

A: The Quadro P2000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 550 Ti supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed. The P2000 has a more complete and modern API feature set.

Q: What is the release date difference?

A: The GTX 550 Ti was released on 2011-03-14, while the Quadro P2000 was released on 2017-02-05. This six-year gap explains the substantial technological advancements seen in the P2000.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental gap between these two GPUs stems from their respective architectures and manufacturing processes. The Quadro P2000 is built on the Pascal architecture using a 16 nm TSMC process, packing 4,400 million transistors into a 200 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 22.0M / mm², a figure that highlights the efficiency of modern fabrication. In contrast, the GTX 550 Ti uses the older Fermi 2.0 architecture on a 40 nm TSMC process, with 1,170 million transistors spread across a larger 238 mm² die, resulting in a much lower density of just 4.9M / mm².

The compute core counts reflect this architectural leap. The Quadro P2000 features 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 40 raster operation pipelines (ROPs). The GTX 550 Ti, by comparison, has only 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. This substantial difference in core configuration directly impacts parallel processing capabilities, with the P2000 offering over five times the shading units of the older card.

Clock speeds and memory architecture also differ significantly. The Quadro P2000 operates at a base clock of 1076 MHz with a boost clock of 1480 MHz, paired with memory running at 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The GTX 550 Ti has no listed base or boost clocks, but its memory runs at 1026 MHz (4.1 Gbps effective). While the GTX 550 Ti has a wider 192-bit memory bus compared to the P2000's 160-bit bus, the P2000’s higher memory clock and larger 5 GB capacity give it superior overall bandwidth of 140.2 GB/s versus 98.50 GB/s.

The process node advantage cannot be overstated. The 16 nm node allows the P2000 to achieve dramatically higher performance while consuming less power. The P2000’s TDP of 75 W is significantly lower than the GTX 550 Ti’s 116 W, and the P2000 requires no external power connectors, whereas the GTX 550 Ti needs a single 6-pin connector. The P2000 also supports PCIe 3.0 x16, while the GTX 550 Ti is limited to PCIe 2.0 x16, offering double the interconnect bandwidth.

The Verdict

The data unequivocally favors the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 for any application requiring modern compute performance. Its 251.2% lead in Geekbench OpenCL, combined with newer architecture, higher memory capacity, and lower power draw, makes it the superior choice for professional workloads, content creation, and any GPU-accelerated tasks. The P2000’s support for Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1) ensures compatibility with current software standards, while its single-slot design and lack of power connectors make it easier to integrate into compact systems.

The GTX 550 Ti, while a capable card in its era, is now severely outdated. Its Fermi 2.0 architecture lacks modern features, its 1024 MB memory capacity is insufficient for contemporary applications, and its higher power consumption with lower performance makes it a poor option for anything beyond legacy systems. The GTX 550 Ti’s only listed benchmark score of 5731 in Geekbench OpenCL places it in the 33rd percentile of all GPUs, compared to the P2000’s 35th percentile, but this narrow percentile gap belies the massive performance difference in actual workloads.

For users with modern software demands, the Quadro P2000 is the only rational choice. Its higher transistor count, superior core configuration, and advanced architecture deliver performance that the GTX 550 Ti cannot approach. The GTX 550 Ti should only be considered for vintage system builds or compatibility with legacy software that requires Fermi-era drivers.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Quadro P2000 | GTX 550 Ti |

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

| Architecture | Pascal | Fermi 2.0 |

| Process Node | 16 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 4,400 million | 1,170 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 238 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 22.0M / mm² | 4.9M / mm² |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 192 |

| TMUs | 64 | 32 |

| ROPs | 40 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 1076 MHz | None listed |

| Boost Clock | 1480 MHz | None listed |

| Memory Size | 5 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Bus | 160 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 140.2 GB/s | 98.50 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective) | 1026 MHz (4.1 Gbps effective) |

| FP32 Performance | 3.031 TFLOPS | 691.2 GFLOPS |

| Pixel Rate | 59.20 GPixel/s | 7.200 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 94.72 GTexel/s | 28.80 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 75 W | 116 W |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | None listed |

| Length | 196 mm | 210 mm |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark between these two GPUs is Geekbench OpenCL, where the results are stark. The Quadro P2000 scores 20125, while the GTX 550 Ti scores 5731, giving the P2000 a 251.2% advantage. This means the P2000 delivers over three and a half times the OpenCL compute performance of the GTX 550 Ti, a margin that reflects the fundamental architectural improvements across six years of GPU development.

Beyond this single test, the broader benchmark suite for the P2000 paints a picture of a well-rounded performer. In Passmark tests, the P2000 achieves 6956 in G3D, 2933 in GPU Compute, 626 in G2D, and scores of 124, 47, 34, and 28 in DirectX 9, 11, 10, and 12 respectively. These scores, while not directly comparable to the GTX 550 Ti due to missing data, demonstrate the P2000’s capability across various graphics and compute workloads. The P2000’s average benchmark score of 6049 places it near rivals like the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (deltaPct -0.5%) and AMD Radeon 760M (deltaPct 0.5%), indicating it competes with modern entry-level discrete and integrated GPUs.

The GTX 550 Ti, with only its Geekbench OpenCL score of 5731, sits in a similar average score range (5731) but near different rivals. Its closest competitors include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX (deltaPct 0.2%), Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 (deltaPct 0.3%), and AMD Radeon HD 8790M (deltaPct 0.7%). This places the GTX 550 Ti at the performance level of early-to-mid 2010s mobile and integrated graphics, further highlighting its obsolescence relative to the P2000.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro P2000 wins decisively in nearly every measurable category. Its advantages in compute performance, memory capacity, API support, and power efficiency make it the preferred choice for professional 3D rendering, video editing, scientific computing, and any workload that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan acceleration. The 5 GB memory capacity allows it to handle larger datasets and textures than the GTX 550 Ti’s 1024 MB, which is critical for modern applications that frequently exceed 2 GB of VRAM usage.

The P2000’s DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support up to four displays, making it suitable for multi-monitor professional setups. Its single-slot design and lack of power connectors simplify installation in workstations with limited space or power delivery. The Pascal architecture’s efficiency, evidenced by the 75 W TDP, means it can operate in systems with modest power supplies, further expanding its compatibility.

The GTX 550 Ti has no benchmark wins over the P2000 in the data provided. Its only potential advantage lies in its wider 192-bit memory bus, which provides a theoretical edge in memory bandwidth per clock cycle, but this is negated by its lower clock speeds and smaller memory pool. The GTX 550 Ti’s dual-slot design and 6-pin power connector requirement make it less convenient, while its lack of Vulkan support and older DirectX feature level (11_0) limit its compatibility with modern games and software. The GTX 550 Ti may find a niche in retro gaming builds or systems requiring legacy DVI output, but for any performance-oriented task, the Quadro P2000 is the unequivocal winner.