Quadro K2000M vs Radeon R9 M375

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 K2000M vs Radeon R9 M375 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 K2000M vs Radeon R9 M375: 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 K2000M

2012

Why buy it

✅Draws 55W instead of 75W, a 20W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon R9 M375 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌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 3.3 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $300 MSRP).

Radeon R9 M375

2015

Why buy it

✅25.4% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 3.3 vs 0 G3D/$ ($300 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).

Trade-offs

❌2015 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌36.4% higher power demand at 75W vs 55W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Radeon R9 M375 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 25.4% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. PassMark G3D leans toward Quadro K2000M instead at 1,004 vs 998, 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?

Quadro K2000M is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond because it comes out ahead on the available hardware-headroom signals for this matchup.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon R9 M375 makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, Radeon R9 M375 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, Quadro K2000M has the stronger long-term case.

Quadro K2000M vs Radeon R9 M375 Technical Specifications

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

Quadro K2000M

The Quadro K2000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 1 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,004 points. Launch price was $265.27.

Radeon R9 M375

The Radeon R9 M375 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 5 2015. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1000 MHz to 1015 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 998 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro K2000M scores 1,004 and the Radeon R9 M375 reaches 998 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K2000M is built on Kepler while the Radeon R9 M375 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (Quadro K2000M) vs 640 (Radeon R9 M375). Raw compute: 0.5722 TFLOPS (Quadro K2000M) vs 1.299 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M375).

Feature	Quadro K2000M	Radeon R9 M375
G3D Mark Score	1,004	998
Architecture	Kepler	GCN 1.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	384	640+67%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.5722 TFLOPS	1.299 TFLOPS+127%
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	32	40+25%
L1 Cache	32 KB	160 KB+400%
L2 Cache	256 KB	256 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro K2000M	Radeon R9 M375
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 K2000M has 2 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 M375 carries 4 GB. Radeon R9 M375 gives you 100% 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 K2000M and 128-bit on the Radeon R9 M375.

Feature	Quadro K2000M	Radeon R9 M375
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	4 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	256 KB	256 KB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 11.1 (11_0) (Quadro K2000M) vs 11_1 (Radeon R9 M375). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.

Feature	Quadro K2000M	Radeon R9 M375
DirectX	11.1 (11_0)	11_1
Vulkan	1.2	1.3+8%
OpenGL	4.6+7%	4.3
Max Displays	4+33%	3

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (Quadro K2000M) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 M375). Decoder: PureVideo HD (VP5) vs UVD 6.0. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro K2000M) vs H.264,MPEG-4,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Radeon R9 M375).

Feature	Quadro K2000M	Radeon R9 M375
Encoder	NVENC	VCE 3.0
Decoder	PureVideo HD (VP5)	UVD 6.0
Codecs	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1	H.264,MPEG-4,MPEG-2,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro K2000M draws 55W versus the Radeon R9 M375's 75W — a 30.8% difference. The Quadro K2000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K2000M) vs 350W (Radeon R9 M375). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Mobile. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 75°C.

Feature	Quadro K2000M	Radeon R9 M375
TDP	55W-27%	75W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Mobile
Slots	0	0
Temp (Load)	80°C	75°C-6%
Perf/Watt	18.3+38%	13.3

💰

Value Analysis

The newer card here is Radeon R9 M375 (2015 vs 2012).

Feature	Quadro K2000M	Radeon R9 M375
MSRP	—	$300
Codename	GK107	Tropo
Release	June 1 2012	May 5 2015
Ranking	#886	#889

Search Quadro K2000M on Amazon

Search Radeon R9 M375 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.