NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 vs NVIDIA Quadro M2000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 and the NVIDIA Quadro M2000 is dominated by the RTX 3070, which wins both recorded benchmark tests. The most decisive victory comes in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the RTX 3070 scores 112,821 against the Quadro M2000’s 14,588. That represents a 673.4% advantage, a gap so large it is not a contest but a complete category shift. In practical terms, the RTX 3070 delivers over seven times the raw compute throughput in this API, making it the clear choice for any workload that leverages OpenCL acceleration.

The second recorded test, Geekbench Vulkan, shows a narrower but still substantial margin. The RTX 3070 scores 21,022, while the Quadro M2000 manages 14,475. The delta here is 45.2%, meaning the RTX 3070 is roughly 45% faster in Vulkan-based rendering and compute tasks. While this is not the crushing margin seen in OpenCL, it is still a decisive win that places the RTX 3070 in a different performance tier. The Quadro M2000’s Maxwell architecture, while competent for its era, simply cannot keep pace with Ampere in modern API workloads.

The aggregate benchmark data reinforces this picture. The RTX 3070’s average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 17,208, which places it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT with an average score of 17,083 (0.7% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 at 17,037 (1% behind), and the AMD Radeon HD 7970M at 17,019 (1.1% behind). Only the NVIDIA Tesla K40c edges ahead at 17,468, a 1.5% margin. This clustering shows the RTX 3070 sits in a tight competitive band where small deltas separate closely matched cards, but it holds its own at the top of that group.

The Quadro M2000, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 14,532, placing it in the 56th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M at 14,404 (0.9% behind), the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 at 14,385 (1% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN at 14,373 (1.1% behind). The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT leads it slightly at 14,692, a 1.1% margin. These numbers show the Quadro M2000 is competitive within its own performance bracket, but that bracket is far below the RTX 3070’s. The delta between the two cards’ average scores is roughly 18.4%, a gap that grows much larger in the OpenCL test due to architectural differences.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX 3070 in OpenCL compared to the Quadro M2000?

A: The RTX 3070 scores 112,821 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Quadro M2000 scores 14,588. The RTX 3070 is 673.4% faster, meaning it delivers more than seven times the OpenCL performance.

Q: Is the RTX 3070 faster in Vulkan as well?

A: Yes. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 3070 scores 21,022 against the Quadro M2000’s 14,475, a 45.2% advantage. The RTX 3070 wins this test but by a smaller margin than OpenCL.

Q: What are the memory capacities and types of these two cards?

A: The RTX 3070 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro M2000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 105.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The RTX 3070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Quadro M2000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RTX 3070 has a TDP of 220 W and requires a 550 W suggested PSU, using a 1x 12-pin power connector. The Quadro M2000 has a TDP of 75 W, requires a 250 W suggested PSU, and needs no power connector.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The RTX 3070 has 5,888 shading units, while the Quadro M2000 has 768. The RTX 3070 also has 184 TMUs and 96 ROPs, compared to 48 TMUs and 32 ROPs on the Quadro M2000.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational and profound. The RTX 3070 is built on NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture using the GA104 chip, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm process. It packs 17,400 million transistors into a 392 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 44.4 million per square millimeter. The Quadro M2000, in contrast, uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM206 chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It contains 2,940 million transistors on a 228 mm² die, giving a transistor density of just 12.9 million per square millimeter. The RTX 3070 has roughly six times the transistor count and nearly double the die area, but its much smaller process node means it fits far more logic into that space.

The compute capabilities diverge sharply. The RTX 3070 delivers 20.31 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and the same 20.31 TFLOPS for FP16, indicating a 1:1 ratio. The Quadro M2000 manages 1.786 TFLOPS of FP32 and has no recorded FP16 capability. This is a 11.4x difference in raw FP32 throughput, which explains the massive OpenCL delta. The RTX 3070 also includes 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the Quadro M2000, which has none of either. This makes the RTX 3070 a hardware ray tracing and AI-accelerated compute card, while the Quadro M2000 is a pure rasterization and compute GPU from a pre-RTX era.

Memory architecture is another key divider. The RTX 3070 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, achieving 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro M2000 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with 105.8 GB/s. The RTX 3070 has 4.2x the memory bandwidth, which is critical for high-resolution textures, large datasets, and compute workloads that thrash memory. The pixel and texture rates tell a similar story: the RTX 3070 reaches 165.6 GPixel/s and 317.4 GTexel/s, while the Quadro M2000 is limited to 37.22 GPixel/s and 55.82 GTexel/s.

The RTX 3070’s display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, supporting modern high-refresh and high-resolution panels. The Quadro M2000 offers 4x DisplayPort 1.2, which is older but still adequate for multi-monitor professional setups at the time of its release. The RTX 3070 also uses PCIe 4.0 x16, doubling the bus bandwidth of the Quadro M2000’s PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measurable specification. The RTX 3070 has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 1725 MHz, while the Quadro M2000 operates at 796 MHz base and 1163 MHz boost. The RTX 3070’s memory runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed, compared to the Quadro M2000’s 1653 MHz and 6.6 Gbps effective.

The RTX 3070 has 5,888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The Quadro M2000 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RTX 3070 adds 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores; the Quadro M2000 has none. Pixel and texture rates are 165.6 GPixel/s and 317.4 GTexel/s for the RTX 3070, versus 37.22 GPixel/s and 55.82 GTexel/s for the Quadro M2000.

Power and physical specs are equally divergent. The RTX 3070 has a 220 W TDP, is dual-slot, requires a 1x 12-pin power connector and a 550 W PSU, measures 242 mm (9.5 inches) in length and 112 mm (4.4 inches) in height. The Quadro M2000 has a 75 W TDP, is single-slot, needs no power connector and a 250 W PSU, measures 201 mm (7.9 inches) in length and 111 mm (4.4 inches) in height. The RTX 3070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Quadro M2000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Release dates are far apart: the RTX 3070 launched on 2020-08-31, while the Quadro M2000 launched on 2016-04-07. Both are end-of-life products. The RTX 3070 had a launch MSRP of 499 USD; the Quadro M2000 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database. The RTX 3070’s predecessor is the GeForce 20 series and its successor is the GeForce 40 series. The Quadro M2000’s predecessor is Quadro Kepler and its successor is Quadro Pascal.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3070 wins every recorded benchmark and every specification category that matters for performance. It is the faster card in Geekbench OpenCL by 673.4% and in Geekbench Vulkan by 45.2%. It has more memory, faster memory, more shading units, higher clocks, more bandwidth, and the only ray tracing and tensor cores in this pairing. For any workload that demands raw compute, high-resolution gaming, machine learning inference, or real-time ray tracing, the RTX 3070 is the only viable choice.

The Quadro M2000’s wins are not in performance but in physical and power characteristics. It is a single-slot card with a 75 W TDP, requiring no external power connector and only a 250 W PSU. It is shorter at 201 mm versus 242 mm, making it suitable for compact or legacy systems with limited power delivery. Its 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs may be useful for multi-monitor professional setups that do not need the latest display standards. It is also a much older card, meaning it may be found in existing workstations or as a low-cost upgrade path for systems with minimal power budgets.

The RTX 3070’s higher power requirements (220 W TDP, 550 W PSU) and dual-slot footprint are its only drawbacks. It cannot fit into slim chassis or systems with weak power supplies. But for anyone who can accommodate those requirements, the RTX 3070 offers a 673.4% OpenCL lead and a 45.2% Vulkan lead over the Quadro M2000, making it the superior option for virtually all compute and graphics tasks.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 is the overwhelmingly faster and more capable GPU in this comparison. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, holds a 61st percentile ranking versus the Quadro M2000’s 56th, and exceeds it in every performance metric from shading units to memory bandwidth to FP32 throughput. The RTX 3070’s 20.31 TFLOPS FP32 versus the Quadro M2000’s 1.786 TFLOPS is an 11.4x gap, and its 448.0 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 105.8 GB/s is a 4.2x gap. These are not incremental improvements; they are generational leaps.

For a user building a new system or upgrading for modern gaming, content creation, or compute workloads, the RTX 3070 is the clear recommendation. Its 8 GB GDDR6 memory, ray tracing cores, and tensor cores make it future-proof for DirectX 12 Ultimate titles and AI-accelerated applications. The Quadro M2000 should only be considered for legacy systems where its single-slot, low-power design (75 W TDP, no power connector, 250 W PSU) is a hard requirement, and where the workload is limited to older OpenGL or DirectX 12_1 applications that do not demand high throughput.

The average benchmark scores tell the final story: the RTX 3070 averages 17,208 across all tests, while the Quadro M2000 averages 14,532. That 18.4% aggregate gap understates the OpenCL and Vulkan deltas, which favor the RTX 3070 by 673.4% and 45.2% respectively. If the choice is between these two, the RTX 3070 is the answer unless the physical constraints of the Quadro M2000 are absolute.