Quadro 2000 D vs FirePro V5900
Quadro 2000 D
Popular choices:
FirePro V5900
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 Quadro 2000 D is positioned at rank 288 and the FirePro V5900 is on rank 290, so the Quadro 2000 D offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro 2000 D
Performance Per Dollar FirePro V5900
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro 2000 D is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.6% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FirePro V5900.
| Insight | Quadro 2000 D | FirePro V5900 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.6%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro V5900 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro V5900 holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $35), it costs 57% less, resulting in a 132% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro 2000 D | FirePro V5900 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+132%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($35) | ✅More affordable ($15) |
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 Quadro 2000 D and FirePro V5900
Quadro 2000 D
The Quadro 2000 D is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 5 2011. 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: 1,239 points. Launch price was $599.
FirePro V5900
The FirePro V5900 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 24 2011. It features the TeraScale 3 architecture. The core clock speed is 600 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,232 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro 2000 D scores 1,239 and the FirePro V5900 reaches 1,232 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro 2000 D is built on Fermi while the FirePro V5900 uses TeraScale 3, both on a 40 nm process. Shader units: 192 (Quadro 2000 D) vs 512 (FirePro V5900). Raw compute: 0.48 TFLOPS (Quadro 2000 D) vs 0.6144 TFLOPS (FirePro V5900).
| Feature | Quadro 2000 D | FirePro V5900 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,239 | 1,232 |
| Architecture | Fermi | TeraScale 3 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 512+167% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.48 TFLOPS | 0.6144 TFLOPS+28% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 32 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB+100% | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro 2000 D | FirePro V5900 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Quadro 2000 D comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the FirePro V5900 has 2 GB. The Quadro 2000 D offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Quadro 2000 D) vs 512 KB (FirePro V5900) — the FirePro V5900 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro 2000 D | FirePro V5900 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (Quadro 2000 D) vs 11.2 (FirePro V5900). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.4. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 3.
| Feature | Quadro 2000 D | FirePro V5900 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0)+7% | 11.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+5% | 4.4 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 3+50% |
Media & Encoding
Decoder: NVDEC 1 vs UVD 3.1. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 (Quadro 2000 D) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (FirePro V5900).
| Feature | Quadro 2000 D | FirePro V5900 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | — | None |
| Decoder | NVDEC 1 | UVD 3.1 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro 2000 D draws 62W versus the FirePro V5900's 75W — a 19% difference. The Quadro 2000 D is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro 2000 D) vs 350W (FirePro V5900). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 178mm vs 229mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 80.
| Feature | Quadro 2000 D | FirePro V5900 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 62W-17% | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 178mm | 229mm |
| Height | 111mm | 112mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C-6% | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 20.0+22% | 16.4 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro 2000 D launched at $599 MSRP and currently averages $35, while the FirePro V5900 launched at $599 and now averages $15. The FirePro V5900 costs 57.1% less ($20 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 35.4 (Quadro 2000 D) vs 82.1 (FirePro V5900) — the FirePro V5900 offers 131.9% better value.
| Feature | Quadro 2000 D | FirePro V5900 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $599 | $599 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $35 | $15-57% |
| Performance per Dollar | 35.4 | 82.1+132% |
| Codename | GF106 | Cayman |
| Release | October 5 2011 | May 24 2011 |
| Ranking | #892 | #812 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro 2000 D and FirePro V5900
