Quadro K2000 vs Radeon 630

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 Radeon 630 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 Radeon 630: 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

✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (2 GB vs 512 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon 630 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.
❌
499% HIGHER MSRP
$599 MSRPvs$100 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 2.6 vs 15.8 G3D/$ ($599 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).

Radeon 630

2019

Why buy it

✅51.9% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Costs $499 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
✅Delivers 496.3% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 15.8 vs 2.6 G3D/$ ($100 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
✅Quadro K2000 is already obsolete for modern gaming, so Radeon 630 is the less risky modern option long term.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 512 MB vs 2 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2019 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Radeon 630 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 51.9% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. PassMark G3D leans toward Quadro K2000 instead at 1,582 vs 1,575, so for this question the real-game FPS result matters more than the synthetic split.

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

Radeon 630 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: the newer upscaling stack, FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack, a 14nm process instead of 28nm, and a newer 2019 generation instead of 2013. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon 630 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $499 cheaper on MSRP at $100 vs $599, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 496.3% (15.8 vs 2.6), so the value case lines up with the gaming result.

Quadro K2000 vs Radeon 630 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.

Radeon 630

The Radeon 630 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 13 2019. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1082 MHz to 1218 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,575 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro K2000 scores 1,582 and the Radeon 630 reaches 1,575 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K2000 is built on Kepler while the Radeon 630 uses GCN 4.0, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 384 (Quadro K2000) vs 512 (Radeon 630). Raw compute: 0.7327 TFLOPS (Quadro K2000) vs 1.247 TFLOPS (Radeon 630).

Feature	Quadro K2000	Radeon 630
G3D Mark Score	1,582	1,575
Architecture	Kepler	GCN 4.0
Process Node	28 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	384	512+33%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.7327 TFLOPS	1.247 TFLOPS+70%
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	32	32
L1 Cache	32 KB	128 KB+300%
L2 Cache	256 KB	512 KB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro K2000	Radeon 630
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro K2000 has 2 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon 630 carries 512 MB. Quadro K2000 gives you 300% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the Quadro K2000 and 128-bit on the Radeon 630. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Quadro K2000) vs 512 KB (Radeon 630) — the Radeon 630 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro K2000	Radeon 630
VRAM Capacity	2 GB+300%	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	256 KB	512 KB+100%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro K2000 draws 51W versus the Radeon 630's 50W — a 2% difference. The Radeon 630 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K2000) vs 350W (Radeon 630). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	Quadro K2000	Radeon 630
TDP	51W	50W-2%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	202mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	1	—
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	31.0	31.5+2%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Quadro K2000 came in at $599, while the Radeon 630 launched at $100. On MSRP, Radeon 630 was 83.3% cheaper ($499 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 2.6 (Quadro K2000) vs 15.8 (Radeon 630) — the Radeon 630 offers 507.7% better value. The newer card here is Radeon 630 (2019 vs 2013).

Feature	Quadro K2000	Radeon 630
MSRP	$599	$100-83%
Performance per Dollar	2.6	15.8+508%
Codename	GK107	Polaris 23
Release	March 1 2013	May 13 2019
Ranking	#756	#757

Search Quadro K2000 on Amazon

Search Radeon 630 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.