Quadro K2000 vs GeForce RTX 3070
Quadro K2000
Popular choices:
GeForce RTX 3070
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. The Quadro K2000 is positioned at rank #261 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K2000
Performance Per Dollar GeForce RTX 3070
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 3070 is significantly newer (2020 vs 2013). The GeForce RTX 3070 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro K2000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce RTX 3070 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1301.5% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (8 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro K2000.
| Insight | Quadro K2000 | GeForce RTX 3070 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1301.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1301.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🔮Strong Longevity (Ampere (2020−2025) / 8nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 2 Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce RTX 3070 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $200 versus $500 for the Quadro K2000, it costs 60% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 3403.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro K2000 | GeForce RTX 3070 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+3403.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500) | ✅More affordable ($200) |
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 K2000 and GeForce RTX 3070
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.
GeForce RTX 3070
The GeForce RTX 3070 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 1 2020. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 1500 MHz to 1725 MHz. It has 5888 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 220W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 22,172 points. Launch price was $499.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Quadro K2000 scores 1,582 versus the GeForce RTX 3070's 22,172 — the GeForce RTX 3070 leads by 1301.5%. The Quadro K2000 is built on Kepler while the GeForce RTX 3070 uses Ampere, both on 28 nm vs 8 nm. Shader units: 384 (Quadro K2000) vs 5,888 (GeForce RTX 3070). Raw compute: 0.7327 TFLOPS (Quadro K2000) vs 20.31 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 3070).
| Feature | Quadro K2000 | GeForce RTX 3070 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,582 | 22,172+1302% |
| Architecture | Kepler | Ampere |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 5888+1433% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7327 TFLOPS | 20.31 TFLOPS+2672% |
| ROPs | 16 | 96+500% |
| TMUs | 32 | 184+475% |
| L1 Cache | 0.03 MB | 5.8 MB+19233% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 4 MB+1500% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K2000 | GeForce RTX 3070 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 2.0 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 / AFMF (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro K2000 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 3070 has 8 GB. The GeForce RTX 3070 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Quadro K2000) vs 4 MB (GeForce RTX 3070) — the GeForce RTX 3070 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro K2000 | GeForce RTX 3070 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 8 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 256-bit+300% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 4 MB+1500% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (Quadro K2000) vs 12 Ultimate (GeForce RTX 3070). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro K2000 | GeForce RTX 3070 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.4+17% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st gen (Quadro K2000) vs NVENC 7th gen (GeForce RTX 3070). Decoder: NVDEC 1st gen vs NVDEC 5th gen. Supported codecs: H.264 (Quadro K2000) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,AV1,VP9 (GeForce RTX 3070).
| Feature | Quadro K2000 | GeForce RTX 3070 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 1st gen | NVENC 7th gen |
| Decoder | NVDEC 1st gen | NVDEC 5th gen |
| Codecs | H.264 | H.264,H.265/HEVC,AV1,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K2000 draws 51W versus the GeForce RTX 3070's 220W — a 124.7% difference. The Quadro K2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K2000) vs 650W (GeForce RTX 3070). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 8-pin. Card length: 202mm vs 242mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | Quadro K2000 | GeForce RTX 3070 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 51W-77% | 220W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-46% | 650W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 8-pin |
| Length | 202mm | 242mm |
| Height | 111mm | 112mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-7% | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 31.0 | 100.8+225% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro K2000 launched at $599 MSRP and currently averages $500, while the GeForce RTX 3070 launched at $499 and now averages $200. The GeForce RTX 3070 costs 60% less ($300 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 3.2 (Quadro K2000) vs 110.9 (GeForce RTX 3070) — the GeForce RTX 3070 offers 3365.6% better value. The GeForce RTX 3070 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2013).
| Feature | Quadro K2000 | GeForce RTX 3070 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $599 | $499-17% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $500 | $200-60% |
| Performance per Dollar | 3.2 | 110.9+3366% |
| Codename | GK107 | GA104 |
| Release | March 1 2013 | September 1 2020 |
| Ranking | #756 | #63 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro K2000 and GeForce RTX 3070
