CPU
GPU
Quadro T2000
Popular choices:
Radeon Pro 580X
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 Radeon Pro 580X is on rank 117, so the Radeon Pro 580X 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 Radeon Pro 580X
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon Pro 580X is significantly newer (2019 vs 2010). The Radeon Pro 580X likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro T2000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon Pro 580X is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.6% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (8 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro T2000.
| Insight | Quadro T2000 | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014)) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) (14nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro T2000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $200 for the Radeon Pro 580X, it costs 63% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 157.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro T2000 | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+157.4%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($75) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) |
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 Radeon Pro 580X
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.
Radeon Pro 580X
The Radeon Pro 580X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 18 2019. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1100 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,540 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro T2000 scores 7,279 and the Radeon Pro 580X reaches 7,540 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro T2000 is built on Fermi while the Radeon Pro 580X uses GCN 4.0, both on 40 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 192 (Quadro T2000) vs 2,304 (Radeon Pro 580X). Raw compute: 0.48 TFLOPS (Quadro T2000) vs 5.53 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro 580X).
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,279 | 7,540+4% |
| Architecture | Fermi | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 2304+1100% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.48 TFLOPS | 5.53 TFLOPS+1052% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 32 | 144+350% |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | 576 KB+125% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| 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 T2000 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro 580X has 8 GB. The Radeon Pro 580X offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Quadro T2000) vs 2 MB (Radeon Pro 580X) — the Radeon Pro 580X has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| 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 (Radeon Pro 580X). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 7.0 (Quadro T2000) vs VCE 3.4 (Radeon Pro 580X). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP9 vs UVD 6.3. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro T2000) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Radeon Pro 580X).
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 7.0 | VCE 3.4 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP9 | UVD 6.3 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro T2000 draws 62W versus the Radeon Pro 580X's 150W — a 83% difference. The Quadro T2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro T2000) vs 350W (Radeon Pro 580X). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 62W-59% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 117.4+133% | 50.3 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro T2000 launched at $600 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Radeon Pro 580X launched at $600 and now averages $200. The Quadro T2000 costs 62.5% less ($125 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 97.1 (Quadro T2000) vs 37.7 (Radeon Pro 580X) — the Quadro T2000 offers 157.6% better value. The Radeon Pro 580X is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2010).
| Feature | Quadro T2000 | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $600 | $600 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75-63% | $200 |
| Performance per Dollar | 97.1+158% | 37.7 |
| Codename | GF106 | Polaris 20 |
| Release | December 24 2010 | March 18 2019 |
| Ranking | #902 | #339 |
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 Radeon Pro 580X
