
Quadro P2000
Popular choices:

Tesla M60
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. The Quadro P2000 is positioned at rank 89 and the Tesla M60 is on rank 277, so the Quadro P2000 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro P2000
Performance Per Dollar Tesla M60
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Tesla M60 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.5% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro P2000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro P2000 | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (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 | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro P2000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro P2000 holds the technical lead. Priced at $190 (vs $250), it costs 24% less, resulting in a 30.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro P2000 | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+30.9%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($190) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($250) |
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 P2000 and Tesla M60

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.

Tesla M60
The Tesla M60 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 557 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 2048 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 300W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,002 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro P2000 scores 6,964 and the Tesla M60 reaches 7,002 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro P2000 is built on Pascal while the Tesla M60 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 16 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (Quadro P2000) vs 2,048 (Tesla M60). Raw compute: 3.031 TFLOPS (Quadro P2000) vs 4.825 TFLOPS ×2 (Tesla M60). Boost clocks: 1480 MHz vs 1178 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro P2000 | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,964 | 7,002 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1024 | 2048 ×2+100% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.031 TFLOPS | 4.825 TFLOPS ×2+59% |
| Boost Clock | 1480 MHz+26% | 1178 MHz |
| ROPs | 40 | 64 ×2+60% |
| TMUs | 64 | 128 ×2+100% |
| L1 Cache | 384 KB | 768 KB+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB | 2 MB+60% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro P2000 | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 P2000 comes with 5 GB of VRAM, while the Tesla M60 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 2 MB (Tesla M60) — the Tesla M60 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro P2000 | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 5 GB+25% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB | 2 MB+60% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.0 (Quadro P2000) vs 12.1 (Tesla M60). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 0.
| Feature | Quadro P2000 | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6.0 (Quadro P2000) vs NVENC 2.0 (2x) (Tesla M60). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP8 vs PureVideo HD VP6 (2x). Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro P2000) vs MPEG-2,H.264 (Tesla M60).
| Feature | Quadro P2000 | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6.0 | NVENC 2.0 (2x) |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP8 | PureVideo HD VP6 (2x) |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro P2000 draws 75W versus the Tesla M60's 300W — a 120% difference. The Quadro P2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro P2000) vs 350W (Tesla M60). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 201mm vs 267mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | Quadro P2000 | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-75% | 300W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 201mm | 267mm |
| Height | 112mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Perf/Watt | 92.9+299% | 23.3 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro P2000 launched at $425 MSRP and currently averages $190, while the Tesla M60 launched at $3000 and now averages $250. The Quadro P2000 costs 24% less ($60 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 36.7 (Quadro P2000) vs 28.0 (Tesla M60) — the Quadro P2000 offers 31.1% better value. The Quadro P2000 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2015).
| Feature | Quadro P2000 | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $425-86% | $3000 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $190-24% | $250 |
| Performance per Dollar | 36.7+31% | 28.0 |
| Codename | GP106 | GM204 |
| Release | February 6 2017 | August 30 2015 |
| Ranking | #346 | #355 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















