
GRID P40-24Q
Popular choices:

Quadro T2000 Max-Q
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.
GRID P40-24Q
2015Why buy it
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 1.2 vs 0 G3D/$ ($5,699 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌462.5% higher power demand at 225W vs 40W.
Quadro T2000 Max-Q
2019Why buy it
- ✅Less risky long-term buy than GRID P40-24Q: it remains the more sensible modern option while GRID P40-24Q is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
- ✅Draws 40W instead of 225W, a 185W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 1.2 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $5,699 MSRP).
GRID P40-24Q
2015Quadro T2000 Max-Q
2019Why buy it
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 1.2 vs 0 G3D/$ ($5,699 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
Why buy it
- ✅Less risky long-term buy than GRID P40-24Q: it remains the more sensible modern option while GRID P40-24Q is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
- ✅Draws 40W instead of 225W, a 185W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌462.5% higher power demand at 225W vs 40W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 1.2 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $5,699 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is GRID P40-24Q better than Quadro T2000 Max-Q?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does Quadro T2000 Max-Q make more sense than GRID P40-24Q?
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 | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro T2000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 104 FPS | 104 FPS |
| medium | 90 FPS | 89 FPS |
| high | 73 FPS | 74 FPS |
| ultra | 44 FPS | 44 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 91 FPS | 90 FPS |
| medium | 80 FPS | 78 FPS |
| high | 58 FPS | 58 FPS |
| ultra | 33 FPS | 33 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 29 FPS | 29 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 18 FPS | 18 FPS |
| ultra | 16 FPS | 16 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro T2000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 162 FPS | 173 FPS |
| medium | 128 FPS | 148 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 118 FPS |
| ultra | 75 FPS | 89 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 119 FPS | 125 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 103 FPS |
| high | 74 FPS | 84 FPS |
| ultra | 57 FPS | 65 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 68 FPS | 73 FPS |
| medium | 52 FPS | 61 FPS |
| high | 43 FPS | 49 FPS |
| ultra | 32 FPS | 36 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro T2000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 318 FPS | 313 FPS |
| medium | 254 FPS | 251 FPS |
| high | 212 FPS | 209 FPS |
| ultra | 159 FPS | 157 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 238 FPS | 235 FPS |
| medium | 191 FPS | 188 FPS |
| high | 159 FPS | 157 FPS |
| ultra | 119 FPS | 117 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 159 FPS | 157 FPS |
| medium | 127 FPS | 125 FPS |
| high | 106 FPS | 104 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 70 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro T2000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 182 FPS | 189 FPS |
| medium | 148 FPS | 153 FPS |
| high | 133 FPS | 130 FPS |
| ultra | 103 FPS | 104 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 132 FPS | 130 FPS |
| medium | 110 FPS | 106 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 90 FPS |
| ultra | 77 FPS | 70 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 77 FPS | 74 FPS |
| medium | 60 FPS | 59 FPS |
| high | 49 FPS | 48 FPS |
| ultra | 36 FPS | 34 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GRID P40-24Q and Quadro T2000 Max-Q

GRID P40-24Q
GRID P40-24Q
The GRID P40-24Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 557 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,057 points.

Quadro T2000 Max-Q
Quadro T2000 Max-Q
The Quadro T2000 Max-Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1200 MHz to 1620 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 40W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,959 points.
Graphics Performance
The GRID P40-24Q scores 7,057 and the Quadro T2000 Max-Q reaches 6,959 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID P40-24Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro T2000 Max-Q uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID P40-24Q) vs 1,024 (Quadro T2000 Max-Q). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID P40-24Q) vs 3.318 TFLOPS (Quadro T2000 Max-Q). Boost clocks: 1178 MHz vs 1620 MHz.
| Feature | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro T2000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,057+1% | 6,959 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+100% | 1024 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.825 TFLOPS+45% | 3.318 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz | 1620 MHz+38% |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 128+100% | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 0.75 MB | 1 MB+33% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro T2000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR6. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID P40-24Q) vs 1 MB (Quadro T2000 Max-Q) — the GRID P40-24Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro T2000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.0 (GRID P40-24Q) vs 12.1 (Quadro T2000 Max-Q). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro T2000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.3+18% |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 0 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 4.0 (GRID P40-24Q) vs NVENC 7.0 (Quadro T2000 Max-Q). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP7 vs PureVideo HD VP9. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GRID P40-24Q) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro T2000 Max-Q).
| Feature | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro T2000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 4.0 | NVENC 7.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP7 | PureVideo HD VP9 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID P40-24Q draws 225W versus the Quadro T2000 Max-Q's 40W — a 139.6% difference. The Quadro T2000 Max-Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID P40-24Q) vs 350W (Quadro T2000 Max-Q). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro T2000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 40W-82% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Perf/Watt | 31.4 | 174.0+454% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro T2000 Max-Q is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).
| Feature | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro T2000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $5699 | — |
| Codename | GM204 | TU117 |
| Release | August 30 2015 | May 27 2019 |
| Ranking | #433 | #357 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












