CPU
GPU
Quadro T2000
Popular choices:
GRID P40-8Q
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 T2000 is positioned at rank 125 and the GRID P40-8Q is on rank 265, so the Quadro T2000 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro T2000
Performance Per Dollar GRID P40-8Q
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID P40-8Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro T2000.
| Insight | Quadro T2000 | GRID P40-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro T2000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro T2000 holds the technical lead. Priced at $75 (vs $150), it costs 50% less, resulting in a 93.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro T2000 | GRID P40-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+93.9%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($75) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) |
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 T2000 and GRID P40-8Q
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.
GRID P40-8Q
The GRID P40-8Q 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 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,507 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro T2000 scores 7,279 and the GRID P40-8Q reaches 7,507 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro T2000 is built on Fermi while the GRID P40-8Q uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 192 (Quadro T2000) vs 2,048 (GRID P40-8Q). Raw compute: 0.48 TFLOPS (Quadro T2000) vs 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID P40-8Q).
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | GRID P40-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,279 | 7,507+3% |
| Architecture | Fermi | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 2048+967% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.48 TFLOPS | 4.825 TFLOPS+905% |
| ROPs | 16 | 64+300% |
| TMUs | 32 | 128+300% |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | 768 KB+200% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | GRID P40-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR6. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Quadro T2000) vs 2 MB (GRID P40-8Q) — the GRID P40-8Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | GRID P40-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+100% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.1 (Quadro T2000) vs 12.0 (GRID P40-8Q). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 0.
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | GRID P40-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+18% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 7.0 (Quadro T2000) vs NVENC 4.0 (GRID P40-8Q). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP9 vs PureVideo HD VP7. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro T2000) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GRID P40-8Q).
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | GRID P40-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 7.0 | NVENC 4.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP9 | PureVideo HD VP7 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro T2000 draws 62W versus the GRID P40-8Q's 225W — a 113.6% difference. The Quadro T2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro T2000) vs 350W (GRID P40-8Q). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 267mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | GRID P40-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 62W-72% | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 267mm |
| Height | 0mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Perf/Watt | 117.4+251% | 33.4 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro T2000 launched at $600 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the GRID P40-8Q launched at $3000 and now averages $150. The Quadro T2000 costs 50% less ($75 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 97.1 (Quadro T2000) vs 50.0 (GRID P40-8Q) — the Quadro T2000 offers 94.2% better value. The GRID P40-8Q is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2010).
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | GRID P40-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $600-80% | $3000 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75-50% | $150 |
| Performance per Dollar | 97.1+94% | 50.0 |
| Codename | GF106 | GM204 |
| Release | December 24 2010 | August 30 2015 |
| Ranking | #902 | #505 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro T2000 and GRID P40-8Q
