NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two cards compare in average benchmark scores?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 records an average benchmark score of 7157, placing it in the 39th percentile of all GPUs. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 averages 6049, sitting in the 35th percentile. That puts the GTX 970 roughly 18% higher in aggregate performance.

Q: Which card wins the most head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The GeForce GTX 970 dominates the head-to-head set, winning 8 of 9 tests. The Quadro P2000 claims only a single victory, in the Geekbench Vulkan test.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in either direction?

A: The GTX 970's biggest win is in Passmark DirectX 11, where it scores 71 versus 47, a 51.1% advantage. The P2000's only win, Geekbench Vulkan, sees it score 23566 against 20005, a 15.1% margin.

Q: How do the memory subsystems differ?

A: The GTX 970 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 224.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro P2000 carries 5 GB of GDDR5 on a narrower 160-bit bus, producing 140.2 GB/s. Despite less capacity, the GTX 970 offers substantially more memory bandwidth.

Q: What are the power and physical requirements for each card?

A: The GTX 970 has a 148 W TDP, requires dual-slot spacing, uses two 6-pin power connectors, and needs a 300 W suggested PSU. The P2000 draws only 75 W, fits in a single slot, requires no external power connectors, and has a 250 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The GTX 970 delivers 3.920 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 3.031 TFLOPS for the P2000. The GTX 970 also leads in pixel rate (65.97 GPixel/s versus 59.20 GPixel/s) and texture rate (122.5 GTexel/s versus 94.72 GTexel/s).

The Verdict

The recorded data makes a clear split. For raw performance across standard graphics workloads, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 is the stronger choice. Its average benchmark score of 7157 versus 6049, plus victories in 8 of 9 direct comparisons, shows a consistent edge in DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, OpenCL, and 2D tests. The GTX 970 also brings higher FP32 compute, more shading units (1664 versus 1024), and faster memory bandwidth.

The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 earns its place in a different scenario. It wins the Geekbench Vulkan test by 15.1%, indicating better low-level API performance in that specific benchmark. Its 5 GB frame buffer exceeds the GTX 970's 4 GB, which can matter for large datasets. The P2000 also runs at a 75 W TDP with no external power connectors, making it far easier to integrate into compact or power-constrained systems.

Who should pick which? Users prioritizing raw frame rates, legacy DirectX performance, and compute throughput should choose the GTX 970. Users needing a single-slot, low-power card with a larger memory pool and stronger Vulkan results should choose the Quadro P2000. The GTX 970 is the performance leader; the P2000 is the efficiency and form-factor specialist.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The GeForce GTX 970 establishes its dominance early in the Passmark suite. In DirectX 9, it scores 143 against 124, a 15.3% lead. The gap widens in DirectX 10, where 46 beats 34, a 35.3% margin. DirectX 11 shows the largest delta of the entire comparison: 71 versus 47, or 51.1% ahead. DirectX 12 continues the trend with 41 against 28, a 46.4% advantage.

The 2D and compute tests follow the same pattern. Passmark G2D sees the GTX 970 score 764 versus 626, a 22% edge. Passmark G3D shows 9638 against 6956, a 38.6% lead. The GPU compute test has the GTX 970 at 4073 versus 2933, a 38.9% difference. These numbers indicate the GTX 970 is not just faster in specific APIs but consistently faster across the board.

OpenCL results reinforce the GTX 970's general compute advantage. It scores 29982 against the P2000's 20125, a 49% margin. That is the second-largest gap in the entire head-to-head set, trailing only the DirectX 11 result.

The Quadro P2000's sole victory comes in Geekbench Vulkan. There, it scores 23566 versus 20005, a 15.1% win. This is a meaningful data point: in a modern cross-platform graphics API, the P2000 outperforms the older architecture. It suggests the Pascal-based card has better optimization for Vulkan workloads despite lower raw specs.

Overall, the GTX 970 wins 8 of the 9 recorded benchmarks. The average of those wins sits around 37% ahead. The P2000's one win is narrower at 15.1%. This asymmetry matters: the GTX 970's lead is large in most tests, while the P2000's lead is moderate in a single test.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every core specification. The GTX 970 uses the GM204 chip with a 28 nm process from TSMC, while the P2000 uses GP106 on a 16 nm process, also TSMC. Transistor counts differ: 5,200 million for the GTX 970 versus 4,400 million for the P2000. Die size favors the P2000 at 200 mm² against 398 mm², and transistor density is higher on the P2000 at 22.0M per mm² versus 13.1M per mm².

Clock speeds also diverge. The GTX 970 runs at 1050 MHz base and 1178 MHz boost. The P2000 starts at 1076 MHz base but boosts to 1480 MHz. Memory clocks are nearly identical at 1753 MHz versus 1752 MHz, both operating at 7 Gbps effective.

Memory configuration shows a trade-off. The GTX 970 has 4 GB on a 256-bit bus with 224.4 GB/s bandwidth. The P2000 has 5 GB on a 160-bit bus with 140.2 GB/s. The GTX 970 wins on bandwidth by 60%, but the P2000 offers 25% more capacity.

Compute resources favor the GTX 970. It has 1664 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 56 ROPs. The P2000 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. Pixel rate is 65.97 GPixel/s versus 59.20 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 122.5 GTexel/s versus 94.72 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 3.920 TFLOPS versus 3.031 TFLOPS. The P2000 has a listed FP16 figure of 47.36 GFLOPS (1:64), which the GTX 970 does not report.

Power and physical specs differ sharply. The GTX 970 draws 148 W, occupies dual slots, requires two 6-pin connectors, and needs a 300 W PSU. It measures 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide. The P2000 draws 75 W, occupies a single slot, needs no power connectors, and requires a 250 W PSU. It measures 196 mm long and 111 mm tall, with no width listed.

Display outputs differ as well. The GTX 970 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.2. The P2000 offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. Both use PCIe 3.0 x16 and support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 970 is built on Maxwell 2.0, part of the GeForce 900 generation. The P2000 uses Pascal, part of the Quadro Pascal (Px000) generation. This generational gap explains several measured differences.

The process node is the most fundamental architectural split. Maxwell 2.0 uses 28 nm TSMC, while Pascal uses 16 nm TSMC. The smaller node allows the P2000 to pack 4,400 million transistors into just 200 mm², achieving a density of 22.0M per mm². The GTX 970 needs 398 mm² for its 5,200 million transistors, yielding only 13.1M per mm². This density advantage is why the P2000 can deliver competitive performance at a fraction of the power draw.

Shader organization also differs. The GTX 970 has 1664 shading units, while the P2000 has 1024. However, the Pascal architecture's higher boost clock (1480 MHz versus 1178 MHz) partially compensates. Still, the GTX 970's larger core yields higher FP32 throughput: 3.920 TFLOPS versus 3.031 TFLOPS.

The P2000 includes a specific FP16 capability listed as 47.36 GFLOPS (1:64), indicating a heavily rate-limited half-precision path. The GTX 970 does not report FP16 data. This suggests Pascal has some half-precision support, but it is not a strength of either card.

Memory architecture reflects different priorities. The GTX 970's 256-bit bus and 224.4 GB/s bandwidth suit high-resolution texture workloads. The P2000's 160-bit bus and 140.2 GB/s bandwidth are more modest, but its 5 GB capacity exceeds the GTX 970's 4 GB. The P2000 targets workloads where capacity matters more than raw throughput.

Display output capabilities differ by generation. The P2000 supports DisplayPort 1.4a across four outputs, while the GTX 970 uses DisplayPort 1.2 and includes legacy DVI and HDMI 2.0. The newer DisplayPort standard on the P2000 enables higher resolutions and refresh rates over a single cable.

Both cards support the same API levels: DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The architectural differences are therefore concentrated in process efficiency, core layout, and memory design, not in feature-set innovations.

The release timeline supports this reading. The GTX 970 predates the P2000 by roughly two and a half years. The P2000 belongs to a newer generation with a smaller node, yet the GTX 970's larger core still wins most performance comparisons. The P2000's architectural strengths show up in its single Vulkan victory, lower power draw, and denser transistor packing.