
GRID V100D-8Q vs Quadro M2000

GRID V100D-8Q
Popular choices:

Quadro M2000
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. The GRID V100D-8Q is positioned at rank #387 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID V100D-8Q
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID V100D-8Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro M2000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GRID V100D-8Q | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro M2000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro M2000 holds the technical lead. Priced at $50 (vs $10,000), it costs 100% less, resulting in a 19274.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID V100D-8Q | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+19274.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($10,000) | ✅More affordable ($50) |
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 V100D-8Q and Quadro M2000

GRID V100D-8Q
The GRID V100D-8Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 18 2016. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1033 MHz to 1306 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,156 points.

Quadro M2000
The Quadro M2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 8 2016. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 796 MHz to 1163 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,026 points. Launch price was $437.75.
Graphics Performance
The GRID V100D-8Q scores 4,156 and the Quadro M2000 reaches 4,026 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID V100D-8Q is built on Maxwell while the Quadro M2000 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 640 (GRID V100D-8Q) vs 768 (Quadro M2000). Raw compute: 1.672 TFLOPS (GRID V100D-8Q) vs 1.786 TFLOPS (Quadro M2000). Boost clocks: 1306 MHz vs 1163 MHz.
| Feature | GRID V100D-8Q | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,156+3% | 4,026 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 640 | 768+20% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.672 TFLOPS | 1.786 TFLOPS+7% |
| Boost Clock | 1306 MHz+12% | 1163 MHz |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 40 | 48+20% |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB+11% | 288 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID V100D-8Q | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The GRID V100D-8Q comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M2000 has 4 GB. The Quadro M2000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID V100D-8Q) vs 1 MB (Quadro M2000) — the GRID V100D-8Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID V100D-8Q | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID V100D-8Q draws 225W versus the Quadro M2000's 75W — a 100% difference. The Quadro M2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID V100D-8Q) vs 350W (Quadro M2000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GRID V100D-8Q | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 75W-67% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 167mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Perf/Watt | 18.5 | 53.7+190% |
Value Analysis
The GRID V100D-8Q launched at $10000 MSRP and currently averages $10000, while the Quadro M2000 launched at $0 and now averages $50. The Quadro M2000 costs 99.5% less ($9950 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.4 (GRID V100D-8Q) vs 80.5 (Quadro M2000) — the Quadro M2000 offers 20025% better value.
| Feature | GRID V100D-8Q | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $10000 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10000 | $50-100% |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.4 | 80.5+20025% |
| Codename | GM107 | GM206 |
| Release | May 18 2016 | April 8 2016 |
| Ranking | #622 | #491 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















