CPU
GPU
Quadro 2000M
Popular choices:
Radeon R5 435
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 2000M is positioned at rank 162 and the Radeon R5 435 is on rank 376, so the Quadro 2000M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro 2000M
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R5 435
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R5 435 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.5% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro 2000M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro 2000M | Radeon R5 435 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon R5 435 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 2000M and Radeon R5 435
Quadro 2000M
The Quadro 2000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 3 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1029 MHz to 1098 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 758 points.
Radeon R5 435
The Radeon R5 435 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 15 2016. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 780 MHz to 1030 MHz. It has 320 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 762 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro 2000M scores 758 and the Radeon R5 435 reaches 762 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro 2000M is built on Maxwell while the Radeon R5 435 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 640 (Quadro 2000M) vs 320 (Radeon R5 435). Raw compute: 1.405 TFLOPS (Quadro 2000M) vs 0.6592 TFLOPS (Radeon R5 435). Boost clocks: 1098 MHz vs 1030 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro 2000M | Radeon R5 435 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 758 | 762 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 640+100% | 320 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.405 TFLOPS+113% | 0.6592 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1098 MHz+7% | 1030 MHz |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 40+100% | 20 |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB+300% | 80 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+1438% | 0.13 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro 2000M | Radeon R5 435 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 2000M comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R5 435 has 512 MB. The Quadro 2000M offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Quadro 2000M) vs 0.13 MB (Radeon R5 435) — the Quadro 2000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro 2000M | Radeon R5 435 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB+300% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+1438% | 0.13 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro 2000M draws 55W versus the Radeon R5 435's 30W — a 58.8% difference. The Radeon R5 435 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro 2000M) vs 350W (Radeon R5 435). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro 2000M | Radeon R5 435 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 55W | 30W-45% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 168mm |
| Height | — | 69mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Perf/Watt | 13.8 | 25.4+84% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R5 435 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2015).
| Feature | Quadro 2000M | Radeon R5 435 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $80 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $80 |
| Codename | GM107 | Jet |
| Release | December 3 2015 | May 15 2016 |
| Ranking | #550 | #922 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro 2000M and Radeon R5 435
