CPU
GPU
Quadro 2000
Popular choices:
Radeon R7 A265
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 is positioned at rank 314 and the Radeon R7 A265 is on rank 427, so the Quadro 2000 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
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R7 A265
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R7 A265 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 4.9% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro 2000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro 2000 | Radeon R7 A265 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-4.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+4.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro 2000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro 2000 holds the technical lead. Priced at $25 (vs $149), it costs 83% less, resulting in a 468.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro 2000 | Radeon R7 A265 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+468.4%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($25) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($149) |
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.
Path of Exile 2
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro 2000 and Radeon R7 A265
Quadro 2000
The Quadro 2000 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: 948 points. Launch price was $599.
Radeon R7 A265
The Radeon R7 A265 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 9 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 725 MHz to 825 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 994 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro 2000 scores 948 and the Radeon R7 A265 reaches 994 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro 2000 is built on Fermi while the Radeon R7 A265 uses GCN 1.0, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 192 (Quadro 2000) vs 384 (Radeon R7 A265). Raw compute: 0.48 TFLOPS (Quadro 2000) vs 0.6336 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 A265).
| Feature | Quadro 2000 | Radeon R7 A265 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 948 | 994+5% |
| Architecture | Fermi | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 384+100% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.48 TFLOPS | 0.6336 TFLOPS+32% |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 32+33% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB+167% | 96 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro 2000 | Radeon R7 A265 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro 2000 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R7 A265 has 512 MB. The Quadro 2000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | Quadro 2000 | Radeon R7 A265 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB+100% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11_0 (Quadro 2000) vs 12 (11_1) (Radeon R7 A265). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Quadro 2000 | Radeon R7 A265 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11_0 | 12 (11_1)+9% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st Gen (Quadro 2000) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon R7 A265). Decoder: VP4 vs UVD 4.0.
| Feature | Quadro 2000 | Radeon R7 A265 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 1st Gen | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | VP4 | UVD 4.0 |
| Codecs | — | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro 2000 draws 62W versus the Radeon R7 A265's 30W — a 69.6% difference. The Radeon R7 A265 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro 2000) vs 350W (Radeon R7 A265). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro 2000 | Radeon R7 A265 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 62W | 30W-52% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 178mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 15.3 | 33.1+116% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro 2000 launched at $599 MSRP and currently averages $25, while the Radeon R7 A265 launched at $149 and now averages $149. The Quadro 2000 costs 83.2% less ($124 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 37.9 (Quadro 2000) vs 6.7 (Radeon R7 A265) — the Quadro 2000 offers 465.7% better value. The Radeon R7 A265 is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2010).
| Feature | Quadro 2000 | Radeon R7 A265 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $599 | $149-75% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $25-83% | $149 |
| Performance per Dollar | 37.9+466% | 6.7 |
| Codename | GF106 | Opal |
| Release | December 24 2010 | January 9 2014 |
| Ranking | #902 | #890 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro 2000 and Radeon R7 A265
