Quadro P2000 vs Radeon R9 285

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 P2000 is positioned at rank #89 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Balanced cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

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 P2000

#49

RTX 2000E Ada Generation

MSRP: $999|Avg: $999

93%

#50

RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF Edition

MSRP: $1999|Avg: $1750

92%

#51

RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell

MSRP: $2399|Avg: $2015

90%

#52

RTX A1000

MSRP: $749|Avg: $500

88%

#54

Radeon Pro 5700

MSRP: $799|Avg: $250

88%

#55

Quadro P4000

MSRP: $815|Avg: $290

86%

#74

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

901%

#89

Quadro P2000

MSRP: $425|Avg: $190

100%

#90

Quadro T1000

MSRP: $400|Avg: $425

99%

#93

Radeon Pro 580

MSRP: $500|Avg: $150

95%

#94

T1000 8GB

MSRP: $500|Avg: $380

94%

#99

Quadro K620

MSRP: $150|Avg: $30

90%

#100

Tesla K20Xm

MSRP: $7699|Avg: N/A

90%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro P2000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 4.3% higher G3D Mark score and 25% more VRAM (5 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 285.

Insight	Quadro P2000	Radeon R9 285
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+4.3%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-4.3%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+25%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The Radeon R9 285 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R9 285 holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $190), it costs 79% less, resulting in a 355.6% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Quadro P2000	Radeon R9 285
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+355.6%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($190)	✅More affordable ($40)

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 P2000 Benchmark Check

Radeon R9 285 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Quadro P2000 and Radeon R9 285

Quadro P2000

The Quadro P2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 6 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1076 MHz to 1480 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,964 points. Launch price was $585.

Radeon R9 285

The Radeon R9 285 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in September 2 2014. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 918 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 190W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,680 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro P2000 scores 6,964 and the Radeon R9 285 reaches 6,680 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro P2000 is built on Pascal while the Radeon R9 285 uses GCN 3.0, both on 16 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (Quadro P2000) vs 1,792 (Radeon R9 285). Raw compute: 3.031 TFLOPS (Quadro P2000) vs 3.29 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 285).

Feature	Quadro P2000	Radeon R9 285
G3D Mark Score	6,964+4%	6,680
Architecture	Pascal	GCN 3.0
Process Node	16 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1024	1792+75%
Compute (TFLOPS)	3.031 TFLOPS	3.29 TFLOPS+9%
ROPs	40+25%	32
TMUs	64	112+75%
L1 Cache	384 KB	448 KB+17%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB+150%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro P2000	Radeon R9 285
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro P2000 comes with 5 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 285 has 4 GB. The Quadro P2000 offers 25% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1.25 MB (Quadro P2000) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 285) — the Quadro P2000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro P2000	Radeon R9 285
VRAM Capacity	5 GB+25%	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR5
Bus Width	256-bit	256-bit
L2 Cache	1.25 MB+150%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12.0 (Quadro P2000) vs 12.0 (Radeon R9 285). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.4. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	Quadro P2000	Radeon R9 285
DirectX	12.0	12.0
Vulkan	1.1	1.2+9%
OpenGL	4.5+2%	4.4
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 6.0 (Quadro P2000) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 285). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP8 vs UVD 5.0. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro P2000) vs MPEG-2,H.264 (Radeon R9 285).

Feature	Quadro P2000	Radeon R9 285
Encoder	NVENC 6.0	VCE 3.0
Decoder	PureVideo HD VP8	UVD 5.0
Codecs	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro P2000 draws 75W versus the Radeon R9 285's 190W — a 86.8% difference. The Quadro P2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro P2000) vs 500W (Radeon R9 285). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 2x 6-pin. Card length: 201mm vs 221mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots.

Feature	Quadro P2000	Radeon R9 285
TDP	75W-61%	190W
Recommended PSU	350W-30%	500W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	2x 6-pin
Length	201mm	221mm
Height	112mm	109mm
Slots	1-50%	2
Temp (Load)	—	65°C
Perf/Watt	92.9+164%	35.2

💰

Value Analysis

The Quadro P2000 launched at $425 MSRP and currently averages $190, while the Radeon R9 285 launched at $249 and now averages $40. The Radeon R9 285 costs 78.9% less ($150 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 36.7 (Quadro P2000) vs 167.0 (Radeon R9 285) — the Radeon R9 285 offers 355% better value. The Quadro P2000 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2014).