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.

GeForce RTX 4070 vs Quadro K2000D FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce RTX 4070 vs Quadro K2000D: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GeForce RTX 4070

2023

Why buy it

✅1526.4% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 1582.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 44.9 vs 2.7 G3D/$ ($599 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
✅500% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (12 GB vs 2 GB).
✅Better long-term bet: Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) on 5nm gives it a newer hardware base for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌292.2% higher power demand at 200W vs 51W.
❌50.5% longer card at 304mm vs 202mm.

Quadro K2000D

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 51W instead of 200W, a 149W reduction.
✅Measures 202mm instead of 304mm, a 102mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 4070 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 12 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
❌2013 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 2.7 vs 44.9 G3D/$ ($599 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GeForce RTX 4070 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 1526.4% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 1582.4% in PassMark G3D (26,919 vs 1,600), so the answer here is pretty clean.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce RTX 4070 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 12 GB vs 2 GB of VRAM, the newer feature stack, with DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution (2023) and DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023), while Quadro K2000D is limited to no meaningful modern upscaling stack and no comparable frame-generation support, a 5nm process instead of 28nm, and 46 vs 0 ray-tracing units. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce RTX 4070 makes the most sense to buy today. It is priced the same on MSRP at $599 vs $599, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 1582.4% (44.9 vs 2.7), so the value case lines up with the gaming result.

GeForce RTX 4070 vs Quadro K2000D Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GeForce RTX 4070

The GeForce RTX 4070 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 12 2023. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 1920 MHz to 2475 MHz. It has 5888 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 26,919 points. Launch price was $599.

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 4070 scores 26,919 versus the Quadro K2000D's 1,600 — the GeForce RTX 4070 leads by 1582.4%. The GeForce RTX 4070 is built on Ada Lovelace while the Quadro K2000D uses Kepler, both on 5 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 5,888 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 384 (Quadro K2000D). Raw compute: 29.15 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 0.7327 TFLOPS (Quadro K2000D).

Feature	GeForce RTX 4070	Quadro K2000D
G3D Mark Score	26,919+1582%	1,600
Architecture	Ada Lovelace	Kepler
Process Node	5 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	5888+1433%	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	29.15 TFLOPS+3878%	0.7327 TFLOPS
ROPs	64+300%	16
TMUs	184+475%	32
L1 Cache	5.8 MB+19233%	0.03 MB
L2 Cache	36 MB+14300%	0.25 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The clearest feature edge for the GeForce RTX 4070 is support for DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation. In games that support it, that can smooth out motion and lift perceived FPS. The Quadro K2000D does not have comparable native support in the same tier.The GeForce RTX 4070 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Quadro K2000D leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce RTX 4070	Quadro K2000D
Upscaling Tech	DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	Yes (DLSS 3.5)	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce RTX 4070 has 12 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro K2000D carries 2 GB. GeForce RTX 4070 gives you 500% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 192-bit on the GeForce RTX 4070 and 64-bit on the Quadro K2000D. L2 Cache: 36 MB (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 0.25 MB (Quadro K2000D) — the GeForce RTX 4070 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce RTX 4070	Quadro K2000D
VRAM Capacity	12 GB+500%	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR6X	GDDR5
Bus Width	192-bit+200%	64-bit
L2 Cache	36 MB+14300%	0.25 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12.2 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 12 (11_0) (Quadro K2000D). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce RTX 4070	Quadro K2000D
DirectX	12.2+2%	12 (11_0)
Vulkan	1.3+8%	1.2
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: 8th Gen NVENC (2x) (GeForce RTX 4070) vs NVENC 1st Gen (Quadro K2000D). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs NVDEC 1st Gen. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro K2000D).

Feature	GeForce RTX 4070	Quadro K2000D
Encoder	8th Gen NVENC (2x)	NVENC 1st Gen
Decoder	5th Gen NVDEC	NVDEC 1st Gen
Codecs	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce RTX 4070 draws 200W versus the Quadro K2000D's 51W — a 118.7% difference. The Quadro K2000D is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 650W (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 350W (Quadro K2000D). Power connectors: 8-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 304mm vs 202mm, occupying 3 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80.

Feature	GeForce RTX 4070	Quadro K2000D
TDP	200W	51W-75%
Recommended PSU	650W	350W-46%
Power Connector	8-pin	PCIe-powered
Length	304mm	202mm
Height	137mm	111mm
Slots	3	1-67%
Temp (Load)	80°C	80
Perf/Watt	134.6+329%	31.4

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce RTX 4070 came in at $599, while the Quadro K2000D launched at $599. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 44.9 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 2.7 (Quadro K2000D) — the GeForce RTX 4070 offers 1563% better value. The newer card here is GeForce RTX 4070 (2023 vs 2013).

Feature	GeForce RTX 4070	Quadro K2000D
MSRP	$599	$599
Performance per Dollar	44.9+1563%	2.7
Codename	AD104	GK107
Release	April 12 2023	March 1 2013
Ranking	#32	#750

Search GeForce RTX 4070 on Amazon

Search Quadro K2000D on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.