
Quadro M2000
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro M2000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro M2000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.6% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design.
| Insight | Quadro M2000 | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.6%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro M2000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $50 (vs $50), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 2.6% better value per dollar than the GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design.
| Insight | Quadro M2000 | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+2.6%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro M2000 and GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design

Quadro M2000
The Quadro M2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 8 2016. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 796 MHz to 1163 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,026 points. Launch price was $437.75.

GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design
The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 3 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1152 MHz to 1417 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,925 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro M2000 scores 4,026 and the GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design reaches 3,925 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M2000 is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 768 (Quadro M2000) vs 768 (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design). Raw compute: 1.786 TFLOPS (Quadro M2000) vs 2.177 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design). Boost clocks: 1163 MHz vs 1417 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro M2000 | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,026+3% | 3,925 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.786 TFLOPS | 2.177 TFLOPS+22% |
| Boost Clock | 1163 MHz | 1417 MHz+22% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 48 | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 288 KB | 288 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro M2000 | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | Quadro M2000 | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12_1 (Quadro M2000) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro M2000 | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 (12_1) |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 2nd Gen (Quadro M2000) vs NVENC (6th Gen) (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design). Decoder: NVDEC 2nd Gen vs NVDEC (3rd Gen).
| Feature | Quadro M2000 | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 2nd Gen | NVENC (6th Gen) |
| Decoder | NVDEC 2nd Gen | NVDEC (3rd Gen) |
| Codecs | — | H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro M2000 draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design's 75W — a 0% difference. The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M2000) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro M2000 | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 167mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | — | 70°C |
| Perf/Watt | 53.7+3% | 52.3 |
Value Analysis
Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 80.5 (Quadro M2000) vs 78.5 (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design) — the Quadro M2000 offers 2.5% better value. The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2016).
| Feature | Quadro M2000 | GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50 | $50 |
| Performance per Dollar | 80.5+3% | 78.5 |
| Codename | GM206 | GP107 |
| Release | April 8 2016 | January 3 2018 |
| Ranking | #491 | #429 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












