GRID P40-8Q vs Quadro T2000
GRID P40-8Q
Popular choices:
Quadro T2000
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GRID P40-8Q is positioned at rank 265 and the Quadro T2000 is on rank 125, so the Quadro T2000 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID P40-8Q
Performance Per Dollar Quadro T2000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID P40-8Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro T2000.
| Insight | GRID P40-8Q | Quadro T2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro T2000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro T2000 holds the technical lead. Priced at $75 (vs $150), it costs 50% less, resulting in a 93.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID P40-8Q | Quadro T2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+93.9%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) | ✅More affordable ($75) |
Performance Check
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 7800X3D 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GRID P40-8Q and Quadro T2000
GRID P40-8Q
The GRID P40-8Q 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: 7,507 points.
Quadro T2000
The Quadro T2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 24 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 62W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,279 points. Launch price was $599.
Graphics Performance
The GRID P40-8Q scores 7,507 and the Quadro T2000 reaches 7,279 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID P40-8Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro T2000 uses Fermi, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID P40-8Q) vs 192 (Quadro T2000). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID P40-8Q) vs 0.48 TFLOPS (Quadro T2000).
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | Quadro T2000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,507+3% | 7,279 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Fermi |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+967% | 192 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.825 TFLOPS+905% | 0.48 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64+300% | 16 |
| TMUs | 128+300% | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 768 KB+200% | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+700% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | Quadro T2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| 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 P40-8Q) vs 0.25 MB (Quadro T2000) — the GRID P40-8Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | Quadro T2000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+700% | 0.25 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.0 (GRID P40-8Q) vs 12.1 (Quadro T2000). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | Quadro T2000 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 P40-8Q) vs NVENC 7.0 (Quadro T2000). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP7 vs PureVideo HD VP9. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GRID P40-8Q) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro T2000).
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | Quadro T2000 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 P40-8Q draws 225W versus the Quadro T2000's 62W — a 113.6% difference. The Quadro T2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID P40-8Q) vs 350W (Quadro T2000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | Quadro T2000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 62W-72% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Perf/Watt | 33.4 | 117.4+251% |
Value Analysis
The GRID P40-8Q launched at $3000 MSRP and currently averages $150, while the Quadro T2000 launched at $600 and now averages $75. The Quadro T2000 costs 50% less ($75 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 50.0 (GRID P40-8Q) vs 97.1 (Quadro T2000) — the Quadro T2000 offers 94.2% better value. The GRID P40-8Q is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2010).
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | Quadro T2000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $3000 | $600-80% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150 | $75-50% |
| Performance per Dollar | 50.0 | 97.1+94% |
| Codename | GM204 | GF106 |
| Release | August 30 2015 | December 24 2010 |
| Ranking | #505 | #902 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GRID P40-8Q and Quadro T2000
