Quadro M5000M vs Quadro T2000

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. The Quadro M5000M is positioned at rank 13 and the Quadro T2000 is on rank 125, so the Quadro M5000M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro M5000M

#1

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

209%

#13

Quadro M5000M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#26

RTX A400

MSRP: $135|Avg: $135

63%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro T2000

#64

RTX 4000 Ada Generation

MSRP: $1999|Avg: $1547

99%

#65

RTX A4000H

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $927

97%

#66

Radeon PRO W7800

MSRP: $2499|Avg: $2200

90%

#67

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation

MSRP: $1999|Avg: $1450

85%

#110

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

1218%

#125

Quadro T2000

MSRP: $600|Avg: $75

100%

#130

FirePro D300

MSRP: $500|Avg: $20

94%

#131

Radeon Pro WX 3200

MSRP: $199|Avg: $199

92%

#132

Radeon Pro WX 5100

MSRP: $499|Avg: $120

91%

#134

Quadro P2000 (móvel)

MSRP: $500|Avg: $150

88%

#135

Quadro P3000 (móvel)

MSRP: $600|Avg: $200

88%

#136

Quadro P3000

MSRP: $600|Avg: $80

88%

#139

Quadro T1000 (móvel)

MSRP: $500|Avg: $120

82%

#140

Radeon Pro V520

MSRP: $800|Avg: $300

82%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro T2000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro M5000M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

Insight	Quadro M5000M	Quadro T2000
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.2%)	✅Leading raw performance (+3.2%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+100%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro T2000 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

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.

Quadro M5000M Benchmark Check

Quadro T2000 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Quadro M5000M and Quadro T2000

Quadro M5000M

The Quadro M5000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 18 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 975 MHz to 1051 MHz. It has 1,536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,056 points.

Quadro T2000

The Quadro T2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 24 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 62W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,279 points. Launch price was $599.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro M5000M scores 7,056 and the Quadro T2000 reaches 7,279 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M5000M is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro T2000 uses Fermi, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 1 (Quadro M5000M) vs 192 (Quadro T2000). Raw compute: 2.995 TFLOPS (Quadro M5000M) vs 0.48 TFLOPS (Quadro T2000).

Feature	Quadro M5000M	Quadro T2000
G3D Mark Score	7,056	7,279+3%
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0	Fermi
Process Node	28 nm	40 nm
Shading Units	1,536+700%	192
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.995 TFLOPS+524%	0.48 TFLOPS
ROPs	64+300%	16
TMUs	96+200%	32
L1 Cache	576 KB+125%	256 KB
L2 Cache	2 MB+700%	0.25 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro M5000M	Quadro T2000
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro M5000M comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro T2000 has 4 GB. The Quadro M5000M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Quadro M5000M) vs 0.25 MB (Quadro T2000) — the Quadro M5000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro M5000M	Quadro T2000
VRAM Capacity	8 GB+100%	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Bus Width	256-bit	256-bit
L2 Cache	2 MB+700%	0.25 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12.1 (Quadro M5000M) vs 12.1 (Quadro T2000). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	Quadro M5000M	Quadro T2000
DirectX	12.1	12.1
Vulkan	1.4+8%	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5.0 (Quadro M5000M) vs NVENC 7.0 (Quadro T2000). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP6 vs PureVideo HD VP9. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264 (Quadro M5000M) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro T2000).

Feature	Quadro M5000M	Quadro T2000
Encoder	NVENC 5.0	NVENC 7.0
Decoder	PureVideo HD VP6	PureVideo HD VP9
Codecs	MPEG-2,H.264	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro M5000M draws 100W versus the Quadro T2000's 62W — a 46.9% difference. The Quadro T2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M5000M) vs 350W (Quadro T2000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.