NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2000D Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data places these two NVIDIA cards at nearly the same overall performance tier, but the comparison is complicated by the fact that each was tested with a different benchmark. The GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 was measured using 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, scoring 4334.5 points. The Quadro K2000D was measured using Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 3919 points. Because the test suites differ, a direct score-to-score comparison is not possible; instead, the database percentile rankings and nearest rival deltas provide the context.

The GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 sits at the 25th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals, based on average scores, include the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 at 4360 points (0.6% higher than the RTX 4070's average of 4335), the AMD FirePro W2100 at 4295 points (0.9% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce 930M at 4388 points (1.2% higher), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M at 4282 points (1.2% lower). This tight cluster, with deltas ranging from -1.2% to +1.2%, indicates that the RTX 4070 GDDR6's average score of 4335 places it in a narrow competitive band where no single rival holds a decisive edge. The spread is remarkably small, suggesting that in this specific benchmark environment, the card trades positions with its closest competitors by less than two percentage points.

The Quadro K2000D sits at the 23rd percentile, marginally lower than the RTX 4070's 25th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D at 3930 points (0.3% higher than the K2000D's 3919), the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 at 3898 points (0.5% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M at 3953 points (0.9% higher), and the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics at 3883 points (0.9% lower). The deltas here are similarly tight, ranging from -0.9% to +0.9%, but the absolute scores are roughly 9% lower than the RTX 4070's cluster. This means that while both cards face close competition within their respective peer groups, the RTX 4070 operates in a higher absolute scoring band.

Looking at the head-to-head benchmark field, the database records zero matched tests between these two cards, and the win counts are zero for each side. This absence of direct comparison means the only reliable cross-referencing tool is the percentile rank. The RTX 4070 GDDR6 outperforms the K2000D in overall standing by two percentile points (25th versus 23rd), but that gap is small enough to be considered negligible in practical terms. What stands out is the difference in benchmark methodology: the RTX 4070 was pushed through a modern DX12 workload (Steel Nomad), while the K2000D was evaluated through a general-purpose OpenCL test. The data does not show how either card would fare in the other's test.

For users looking at the numbers, the practical takeaway is that the RTX 4070 GDDR6 has a higher raw score (4334.5 vs 3919), but the different test conditions prevent any claim of superiority. The percentile ranks, which are normalized across the database, show only a two-point separation. The nearest rival deltas for each card reinforce this: the RTX 4070's closest rival is within 0.6% above it, while the K2000D's closest rival is within 0.3% above it. Neither card dominates its peer group.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 has an average benchmark score of 4335, while the Quadro K2000D has an average score of 3919. The RTX 4070 is roughly 10.6% higher, but the scores come from different benchmark suites (3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 vs Geekbench OpenCL).

Q: How do the two cards compare in percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The RTX 4070 GDDR6 sits at the 25th percentile, and the Quadro K2000D sits at the 23rd percentile. This two-point gap indicates that the RTX 4070 ranks slightly higher in the database, but both cards are positioned in the lower quarter of all recorded GPUs.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each card?

A: For the RTX 4070 GDDR6, the closest rival is the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200, which is 0.6% higher in average score. For the Quadro K2000D, the closest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D, which is 0.3% higher. Both cards have rivals within a 1.2% range.

Q: Do the cards have any head-to-head benchmark results?

A: No. The database records zero direct head-to-head tests between the RTX 4070 GDDR6 and the Quadro K2000D. Each card was tested with a different benchmark, so no matched comparison exists.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The RTX 4070 GDDR6 has 5888 shading units, while the Quadro K2000D has 384 shading units. This is a 15-fold difference in raw shader count, though the benchmark scores do not reflect that proportion due to differing workloads and test conditions.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each card?

A: The RTX 4070 GDDR6 has a memory bandwidth of 480.0 GB/s with 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus. The Quadro K2000D has a memory bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s with 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 wins in most raw computational metrics. Its FP32 throughput is 29.15 TFLOPS versus 732.7 GFLOPS for the K2000D, a factor of roughly 40. Its pixel rate is 158.4 GPixel/s versus 7.632 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 455.4 GTexel/s versus 30.53 GTexel/s. The RTX 4070 also has 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores, while the K2000D has none. Memory capacity favors the RTX 4070 at 12 GB versus 2 GB, and bandwidth favors it at 480.0 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s. In any workload that uses these resources, the RTX 4070 is overwhelmingly ahead.

The Quadro K2000D wins in power efficiency and physical footprint. Its TDP is 51 W versus 200 W for the RTX 4070, meaning the K2000D draws 74% less power according to the recorded TDP values. It is a single-slot card with no power connectors, while the RTX 4070 is dual-slot with a 16-pin connector. The K2000D also has a smaller die size at 118 mm² versus 294 mm² for the RTX 4070. For systems with tight thermal or space constraints, the K2000D is the more practical option despite its lower performance.

The K2000D also wins on legacy display outputs, offering 2x DVI and 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2, whereas the RTX 4070 offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. If a user needs DVI connectivity, the K2000D is the only one of the two that provides it directly.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field. The RTX 4070 GDDR6 uses a 5 nm process node, while the K2000D uses 28 nm. Transistor counts are 35,800 million versus 1,270 million. Die sizes are 294 mm² versus 118 mm², giving transistor densities of 121.8M per mm² versus 10.8M per mm². The RTX 4070 has a base clock of 1920 MHz and a boost clock of 2475 MHz, while the K2000D has no recorded base or boost clocks. Memory clocks are 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective) for the RTX 4070 versus 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for the K2000D.

Memory configurations differ: 12 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus versus 2 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. Shading units are 5888 versus 384, TMUs are 184 versus 32, and ROPs are 64 versus 16. The RTX 4070 has 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores, while the K2000D has none. Pixel rate is 158.4 GPixel/s versus 7.632 GPixel/s, texture rate is 455.4 GTexel/s versus 30.53 GTexel/s, and FP32 is 29.15 TFLOPS versus 732.7 GFLOPS. The RTX 4070 does not record an FP16 value as separate, listing 29.15 TFLOPS (1:1), while the K2000D has no FP16 data.

TDP is 200 W versus 51 W. The RTX 4070 is dual-slot with a 1x 16-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 550 W, while the K2000D is single-slot with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. Bus interfaces are PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 2.0 x16. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 plus 3x DisplayPort 1.4a versus 2x DVI plus 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2. DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (11_0). Vulkan support is 1.4 versus 1.2.175. OpenGL is 4.6 for both. Dimensions differ: the RTX 4070 is 240 mm long, 110 mm high, and 40 mm wide, while the K2000D is 202 mm long and 111 mm high with no recorded width. The RTX 4070 was released in 2024, while the K2000D was released in 2013.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 4070 GDDR6 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD104 chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. It is part of the GeForce 40-series generation, succeeding the GeForce 30 and preceding the GeForce 50. The K2000D is built on the Kepler architecture with the GK107 chip, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 28 nm process. It belongs to the Quadro Kepler (Kx000) generation, succeeding Quadro Fermi and preceding Quadro Maxwell. Both are end-of-life production status.

The Ada Lovelace architecture implements hardware ray tracing with 46 RT cores and AI acceleration with 184 tensor cores, neither of which exists in the Kepler-based K2000D. The RTX 4070 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading, while the K2000D only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0). Vulkan support is newer on the RTX 4070 (version 1.4) versus version 1.2.175 on the K2000D. The transistor density difference, 121.8M per mm² versus 10.8M per mm², reflects the architectural generational leap from 28 nm to 5 nm. The RTX 4070's memory subsystem is GDDR6 with a 192-bit bus, while the K2000D uses GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus. The RTX 4070 has no codename recorded, and neither does the K2000D.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split by use case. The GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 is the choice for any workload that depends on modern graphics features, high throughput, or large memory capacity. Its 29.15 TFLOPS FP32, 158.4 GPixel/s pixel rate, 455.4 GTexel/s texture rate, 46 RT cores, 184 tensor cores, and 12 GB memory make it suitable for contemporary gaming, ray tracing, AI inference, and content creation workloads. Its 25th percentile rank and average score of 4335, while not dominant, place it in a workable performance band for these tasks.

The Quadro K2000D is the choice for legacy or constrained environments. Its 51 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors allow installation in systems where the RTX 4070's 200 W TDP and dual-slot footprint would not fit. Its 2x DVI outputs serve older displays, and its 2 GB memory is sufficient for basic 2D or light 3D tasks. Its 23rd percentile rank and average score of 3919 are close to the RTX 4070's in relative standing, but the absolute performance gap is substantial.

For a user who needs modern API support, the RTX 4070's DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 are ahead of the K2000D's DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. For a user who needs low power draw and minimal space, the K2000D is the only viable option. The database shows no head-to-head wins for either card, so the decision rests on the specification differences and benchmark context. The RTX 4070 GDDR6 is the higher-performing card by every computational metric, and the K2000D is the lower-power, smaller-footprint card. There is no scenario in the data where the K2000D outperforms the RTX 4070 on raw throughput, but there are scenarios where its physical attributes are preferable. Both cards carry the same launch MSRP of 599 USD, a fact that does not alter their performance profiles.