NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 vs NVIDIA Quadro M2000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear, consistent edge for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 in the two shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 670 scores 15341 against the Quadro M2000's 14588, a delta of 4.9% in favor of the older gaming card. The Vulkan result follows the same pattern, with the GTX 670 posting 15553 versus 14475 for the Quadro, widening the gap to 6.9%. These are not marginal differences in the context of these two cards; the GTX 670 leads by a meaningful margin in both compute APIs tested.

Looking at the broader database context, the Quadro M2000 sits at the 56th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 670 occupies the 52nd percentile. This is an interesting inversion: the Quadro ranks higher overall despite losing both head-to-head tests. The explanation lies in the average benchmark score calculation. The Quadro M2000 has an average score of 14532 across its two recorded tests, while the GTX 670's average is dragged down to 12773 by an additional Geekbench Metal score of 7424, a result that is far lower than its OpenCL and Vulkan numbers. The average is skewed by that Metal test, which the Quadro does not have recorded.

The nearest rival data reinforces how close these two cards are to their own competitors. The Quadro M2000's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M at 14404, just 0.9% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT at 14692, which is 1.1% ahead of the Quadro. The GTX 670's nearest rivals cluster even tighter: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 is 0.4% behind, the AMD Radeon Pro 455 is 0.4% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT is 0.5% ahead. Both cards operate in a dense performance band where small percentage swings separate products.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce GTX 670 wins both shared workloads, so the direct comparison is straightforward. In Geekbench OpenCL, it outperforms the Quadro M2000 by 753 points, and in Geekbench Vulkan, the margin expands to 1078 points. The GTX 670's advantage grows when moving from OpenCL to Vulkan, suggesting its architecture handles the newer API with relatively more efficiency compared to the Quadro.

The Quadro M2000's case rests on its overall percentile placement rather than direct benchmark victories. At the 56th percentile, it ranks above the GTX 670's 52nd percentile, and its average benchmark score of 14532 is higher than the GTX 670's 12773. However, this advantage is entirely due to the GTX 670's weak Metal result of 7424, which is not part of the shared test set. In the two tests where both cards were measured under identical conditions, the Quadro never wins.

For use-case analysis, the GTX 670 is the stronger choice for compute workloads measured by OpenCL and Vulkan. The Quadro M2000, despite its professional branding, does not offer any performance advantage in these recorded tests. The data also shows the Quadro has a much lower power profile, with a 75 W TDP versus 170 W for the GTX 670, and it requires no external power connectors while the GTX 670 needs two 6-pin connectors. It also carries 4 GB of memory compared to 2 GB on the GTX 670, which matters for larger datasets even if raw compute throughput favors the GTX 670.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different NVIDIA architectures built on the same 28 nm TSMC process. The Quadro M2000 uses the GM206 chip, based on Maxwell 2.0, while the GTX 670 uses the GK104 chip, based on Kepler. Both are manufactured by TSMC at 28 nm, but the chip designs diverge significantly in transistor count and die size.

The GTX 670's GK104 packs 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.0M per mm². The Quadro M2000's GM206 is smaller in both total transistors, 2,940 million, and die size, 228 mm², but achieves a slightly higher density at 12.9M per mm². The GTX 670 ships with 1344 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Quadro M2000 has 768 shading units and 48 TMUs, but also 32 ROPs. The raw compute figures reflect these differences: the GTX 670 delivers 2.634 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Quadro M2000 manages 1.786 TFLOPS. The GTX 670 also has a higher texture rate at 109.8 GTexel/s versus 55.82 GTexel/s for the Quadro. Interestingly, the Quadro M2000 has a higher pixel rate at 37.22 GPixel/s compared to 27.44 GPixel/s for the GTX 670, despite having the same ROP count.

Memory architecture is another major split. The Quadro M2000 uses a 128-bit bus with 4 GB of GDDR5 running at 6.6 Gbps effective, producing 105.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 670 uses a 256-bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR5 at 6 Gbps effective, producing 192.3 GB/s. The GTX 670 has nearly double the memory bandwidth despite having half the capacity.

API support also differs. The Quadro M2000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 670 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both list OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan support differs: the Quadro lists Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 670 lists Vulkan 1.2.175. The GTX 670 also has a recorded Geekbench Metal score, while the Quadro has none.

Display outputs reflect their intended markets. The Quadro M2000 offers four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the GTX 670 offers two DVI, one HDMI 1.4a, and one DisplayPort 1.2 output, for a total of four outputs as well but with different connector types.

Power delivery is starkly different. The Quadro M2000 is rated at 75 W with no power connectors, making it a single-slot card that fits in a chassis requiring a 250 W suggested PSU. The GTX 670 is rated at 590 W, spans 241 mm in length, and needs two 6-pin power connectors and a 450 W suggested PSU.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the GeForce GTX 670 is the faster card in the two benchmarks both share. It wins Geekbench OpenCL by 4.9% and Geekbench Vulkan by 6.9%, and it also offers substantially higher FP32 compute, texture rate, and memory bandwidth. If the task is raw compute throughput in OpenCL or Vulkan, the GTX 670 is the clear pick.

The Quadro M2000 is not without arguments in its favor, but they are not performance arguments in these tests. It has double the memory capacity, 4 GB versus 2 GB, and it draws far less power, 75 W versus 170 W, with no external power connectors required. Its single-slot design and lower PSU requirement make it easier to integrate into compact or densely populated systems. The Quadro also supports a newer DirectX feature level, 12_1 versus 11_0, and a newer Vulkan version, 1.4 versus 1.2.175.

The percentile data complicates a simple verdict. The Quadro M2000 ranks at the 56th percentile of all GPUs, above the GTX 670's 52nd percentile, solely because the GTX 670's average is depressed by a weak Metal score of 7424. Buyers should weigh the shared benchmark results first, where the GTX 670 wins both, and then weigh the Quadro's advantages in power draw and memory capacity. For a system builder prioritizing compute performance in the measured APIs, the GTX 670 is the stronger choice. For a system where power budget, memory capacity, and slot width are critical constraints, the Quadro M2000 justifies consideration despite its lower raw scores.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 wins with a score of 15341 against the Quadro M2000's 14588, a delta of 4.9%.

Q: Does the Quadro M2000 win any shared benchmark?

A: No. In the two recorded shared tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 670 wins both. The Quadro's higher average benchmark score of 14532 comes from its two tests, while the GTX 670's average of 12773 is reduced by an additional Geekbench Metal score of 7424.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The Quadro M2000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 105.8 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 670 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 192.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are their power requirements?

A: The Quadro M2000 is rated at 75 W TDP with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. The GTX 670 is rated at 170 W TDP with two 6-pin power connectors and a 450 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card has better DirectX support?

A: The Quadro M2000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 670 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The Quadro also lists Vulkan 1.4 support versus Vulkan 1.2.175 for the GTX 670.

Q: How do their FP32 compute figures compare?

A: The GTX 670 delivers 2.634 TFLOPS, while the Quadro M2000 delivers 1.786 TFLOPS. The GTX 670 also has a higher texture rate at 109.8 GTexel/s versus 55.82 GTexel/s for the Quadro, though the Quadro has a higher pixel rate at 37.22 GPixel/s versus 27.44 GPixel/s.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro M2000 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 |

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

| Chip | GM206 | GK104 |

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Kepler |

| Generation | Quadro Maxwell (Mx000) | GeForce 600 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 2,940 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 228 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.9M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 796 MHz | 915 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1163 MHz | 980 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1653 MHz, 6.6 Gbps effective | 1502 MHz, 6 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 105.8 GB/s | 192.3 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 1344 |

| TMUs | 48 | 112 |

| ROPs | 32 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 37.22 GPixel/s | 27.44 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 55.82 GTexel/s | 109.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1.786 TFLOPS | 2.634 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 75 W | 170 W |

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

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 450 W |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.2 | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 |

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.2.175 |

| Length | 201 mm | 241 mm |

| Release Date | 2016-04-07 | 2012-05-09 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Kepler | GeForce 500 |

| Successor | Quadro Pascal | GeForce 700 |