Quadro K2000 vs Quadro K3000M

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.

Quadro K2000 vs Quadro K3000M FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Quadro K2000 vs Quadro K3000M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

Quadro K2000

2013

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 2.6 vs 0 G3D/$ ($599 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅Draws 51W instead of 75W, a 24W reduction.
✅More future proof: Kepler (2012−2018) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro K3000M across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌2013 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

Quadro K3000M

2012

Why buy it

✅71.2% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.

Trade-offs

❌2012 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 2.6 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
❌47.1% higher power demand at 75W vs 51W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Quadro K3000M is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 71.2% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 2.3% in PassMark G3D (1,618 vs 1,582), so the answer here is pretty clean.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Quadro K2000 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: a newer 2013 generation instead of 2012. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Quadro K2000 makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup. Quadro K3000M still makes more sense if max raw gaming performance matters more than value.

Quadro K2000 vs Quadro K3000M Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Quadro K2000

The Quadro K2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 1 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 954 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 51W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,582 points. Launch price was $599.

Quadro K3000M

The Quadro K3000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 1 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 654 MHz. It has 576 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,618 points. Launch price was $155.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro K2000 scores 1,582 and the Quadro K3000M reaches 1,618 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K2000 is built on Kepler while the Quadro K3000M uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (Quadro K2000) vs 576 (Quadro K3000M). Raw compute: 0.7327 TFLOPS (Quadro K2000) vs 0.7534 TFLOPS (Quadro K3000M).

Feature	Quadro K2000	Quadro K3000M
G3D Mark Score	1,582	1,618+2%
Architecture	Kepler	Kepler
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	384	576+50%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.7327 TFLOPS	0.7534 TFLOPS+3%
ROPs	16	32+100%
TMUs	32	48+50%
L1 Cache	32 KB	48 KB+50%
L2 Cache	256 KB	512 KB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro K2000	Quadro K3000M
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards ship with 2 GB of GDDR5. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the Quadro K2000 and 64-bit on the Quadro K3000M. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Quadro K2000) vs 512 KB (Quadro K3000M) — the Quadro K3000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro K2000	Quadro K3000M
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	256 KB	512 KB+100%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro K2000 draws 51W versus the Quadro K3000M's 75W — a 38.1% difference. The Quadro K2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K2000) vs 350W (Quadro K3000M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	Quadro K2000	Quadro K3000M
TDP	51W-32%	75W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	202mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	1	—
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	31.0+44%	21.6

💰

Value Analysis

The newer card here is Quadro K2000 (2013 vs 2012).

Feature	Quadro K2000	Quadro K3000M
MSRP	$599	—
Codename	GK107	GK104
Release	March 1 2013	June 1 2012
Ranking	#756	#748

Search Quadro K2000 on Amazon

Search Quadro K3000M on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.