
GeForce RTX 3070
Popular choices:

Quadro K2000D
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GeForce RTX 3070
2020Why buy it
- ✅+1285.8% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $100 less on MSRP ($499 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1563.5% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 44.4 vs 2.7 G3D/$ ($499 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
- ✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
- ✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 2 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌331.4% higher power demand at 220W vs 51W.
- ❌19.8% longer card at 242mm vs 202mm.
Quadro K2000D
2013Why buy it
- ✅Draws 51W instead of 220W, a 169W reduction.
- ✅Measures 202mm instead of 242mm, a 40mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (1,600 vs 22,172).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on Upscaling support instead.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌20% HIGHER MSRP$599 MSRPvs$499 MSRP
GeForce RTX 3070
2020Quadro K2000D
2013Why buy it
- ✅+1285.8% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $100 less on MSRP ($499 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1563.5% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 44.4 vs 2.7 G3D/$ ($499 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
- ✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
- ✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 2 GB).
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 51W instead of 220W, a 169W reduction.
- ✅Measures 202mm instead of 242mm, a 40mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌331.4% higher power demand at 220W vs 51W.
- ❌19.8% longer card at 242mm vs 202mm.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (1,600 vs 22,172).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on Upscaling support instead.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌20% HIGHER MSRP$599 MSRPvs$499 MSRP
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce RTX 3070 better than Quadro K2000D?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Quadro K2000D still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
Games Benchmarks
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3070 | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 158 FPS | 11 FPS |
| medium | 140 FPS | 7 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 4 FPS |
| ultra | 104 FPS | 3 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 134 FPS | 7 FPS |
| medium | 109 FPS | 4 FPS |
| high | 96 FPS | 2 FPS |
| ultra | 86 FPS | 1 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 80 FPS | 4 FPS |
| medium | 67 FPS | 2 FPS |
| high | 52 FPS | 1 FPS |
| ultra | 45 FPS | 1 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3070 | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 470 FPS | 34 FPS |
| medium | 405 FPS | 15 FPS |
| high | 327 FPS | 11 FPS |
| ultra | 277 FPS | 8 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 294 FPS | 10 FPS |
| medium | 246 FPS | 4 FPS |
| high | 213 FPS | 3 FPS |
| ultra | 179 FPS | 3 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 141 FPS | 3 FPS |
| medium | 120 FPS | 2 FPS |
| high | 105 FPS | 1 FPS |
| ultra | 83 FPS | 1 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3070 | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 885 FPS | 72 FPS |
| medium | 712 FPS | 58 FPS |
| high | 619 FPS | 48 FPS |
| ultra | 499 FPS | 36 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 692 FPS | 54 FPS |
| medium | 557 FPS | 43 FPS |
| high | 473 FPS | 36 FPS |
| ultra | 374 FPS | 27 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 479 FPS | 36 FPS |
| medium | 388 FPS | 29 FPS |
| high | 330 FPS | 24 FPS |
| ultra | 249 FPS | 18 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3070 | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 600 FPS | 63 FPS |
| medium | 527 FPS | 50 FPS |
| high | 433 FPS | 28 FPS |
| ultra | 385 FPS | 18 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 489 FPS | 7 FPS |
| medium | 433 FPS | 5 FPS |
| high | 339 FPS | 4 FPS |
| ultra | 297 FPS | 2 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 292 FPS | 4 FPS |
| medium | 270 FPS | 3 FPS |
| high | 238 FPS | 2 FPS |
| ultra | 200 FPS | 1 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce RTX 3070 and Quadro K2000D

GeForce RTX 3070
GeForce RTX 3070
The GeForce RTX 3070 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 1 2020. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 1500 MHz to 1725 MHz. It has 5888 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 220W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 22,172 points. Launch price was $499.

Quadro K2000D
Quadro K2000D
The Quadro K2000D is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 1 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 954 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 51W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,600 points. Launch price was $599.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce RTX 3070 scores 22,172 versus the Quadro K2000D's 1,600 — the GeForce RTX 3070 leads by 1285.8%. The GeForce RTX 3070 is built on Ampere while the Quadro K2000D uses Kepler, both on 8 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 5,888 (GeForce RTX 3070) vs 384 (Quadro K2000D). Raw compute: 20.31 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 3070) vs 0.7327 TFLOPS (Quadro K2000D).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3070 | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 22,172+1286% | 1,600 |
| Architecture | Ampere | Kepler |
| Process Node | 8 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 5888+1433% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 20.31 TFLOPS+2672% | 0.7327 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 96+500% | 16 |
| TMUs | 184+475% | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 5.8 MB+19233% | 0.03 MB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+1500% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce RTX 3070 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Quadro K2000D relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3070 | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 2 Super Resolution | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce RTX 3070 comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro K2000D has 2 GB. The GeForce RTX 3070 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (GeForce RTX 3070) vs 0.25 MB (Quadro K2000D) — the GeForce RTX 3070 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3070 | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+300% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+300% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+1500% | 0.25 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (GeForce RTX 3070) vs 12 (11_0) (Quadro K2000D). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3070 | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12 (11_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.4+17% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 7th gen (GeForce RTX 3070) vs NVENC 1st Gen (Quadro K2000D). Decoder: NVDEC 5th gen vs NVDEC 1st Gen. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,AV1,VP9 (GeForce RTX 3070) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro K2000D).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3070 | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 7th gen | NVENC 1st Gen |
| Decoder | NVDEC 5th gen | NVDEC 1st Gen |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,AV1,VP9 | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 3070 draws 220W versus the Quadro K2000D's 51W — a 124.7% difference. The Quadro K2000D is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 650W (GeForce RTX 3070) vs 350W (Quadro K2000D). Power connectors: 8-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 242mm vs 202mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 80.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3070 | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 220W | 51W-77% |
| Recommended PSU | 650W | 350W-46% |
| Power Connector | 8-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 242mm | 202mm |
| Height | 112mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C-6% | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 100.8+221% | 31.4 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 3070 launched at $499 MSRP, while the Quadro K2000D launched at $599. The GeForce RTX 3070 costs 16.7% less ($100 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 44.4 (GeForce RTX 3070) vs 2.7 (Quadro K2000D) — the GeForce RTX 3070 offers 1544.4% better value. The GeForce RTX 3070 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2013).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3070 | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $499-17% | $599 |
| Performance per Dollar | 44.4+1544% | 2.7 |
| Codename | GA104 | GK107 |
| Release | September 1 2020 | March 1 2013 |
| Ranking | #63 | #750 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












