Radeon R7 A265 vs Quadro K2000M

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 Radeon R7 A265 is positioned at rank 427 and the Quadro K2000M is on rank 58, so the Quadro K2000M 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 Radeon R7 A265

#417

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

1628%

#419

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

1476%

#420

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

1472%

#424

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

1338%

#425

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

1329%

#427

Radeon R7 A265

MSRP: $149|Avg: $149

100%

#428

Radeon R9 M470

MSRP: $350|Avg: $80

100%

#429

Radeon R9 M385X

MSRP: $300|Avg: $300

100%

#431

Mobility Radeon HD 5570

MSRP: $80|Avg: $20

98%

#432

Radeon R5 M430

MSRP: $99|Avg: $20

98%

#433

GeForce 810A

MSRP: $100|Avg: $20

98%

#434

GeForce GT 520MX

MSRP: $45|Avg: $10

97%

#435

Radeon R5 330

MSRP: $81|Avg: $45

97%

#437

Radeon HD 8450G + 8750M Dual

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

96%

#438

Radeon R3

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

94%

#439

Radeon HD 7520G + HD 8600/8700M Dual

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

94%

#441

Radeon HD 8550G + 8600M Dual

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

93%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro K2000M

#26

Radeon Pro Vega 48

MSRP: $450|Avg: $450

100%

#27

Radeon Pro 5700 XT

MSRP: $500|Avg: $280

99%

#28

Quadro P5200

MSRP: $500|Avg: $240

93%

#29

Radeon PRO W7700

MSRP: $999|Avg: $999

92%

#30

Radeon PRO W6600

MSRP: $649|Avg: $649

92%

#32

Radeon AI PRO R9700

MSRP: $1299|Avg: $1450

88%

#43

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

589%

#58

Quadro K2000M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30

100%

#60

Intel Arc Pro A60

MSRP: $380|Avg: $380

100%

#63

T400 4GB

MSRP: $159|Avg: $99

95%

#64

Radeon Pro 5300

MSRP: $300|Avg: $150

95%

#69

Radeon Pro W5500

MSRP: $399|Avg: $300

89%

#72

Quadro P2200

MSRP: $429|Avg: $227

87%

#73

T1000

MSRP: $350|Avg: $382

87%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro K2000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (2 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R7 A265.

Insight	Radeon R7 A265	Quadro K2000M
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1%)	✅Leading raw performance (+1%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+300%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

The Quadro K2000M offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro K2000M holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $149), it costs 80% less, resulting in a 401.7% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Radeon R7 A265	Quadro K2000M
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+401.7%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($149)	✅More affordable ($30)

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.

Radeon R7 A265 Benchmark Check

Quadro K2000M Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R7 A265 and Quadro K2000M

Radeon R7 A265

The Radeon R7 A265 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 9 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 725 MHz to 825 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 994 points.

Quadro K2000M

The Quadro K2000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 1 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,004 points. Launch price was $265.27.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Radeon R7 A265 scores 994 and the Quadro K2000M reaches 1,004 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R7 A265 is built on GCN 1.0 while the Quadro K2000M uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (Radeon R7 A265) vs 384 (Quadro K2000M). Raw compute: 0.6336 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 A265) vs 0.5722 TFLOPS (Quadro K2000M).

Feature	Radeon R7 A265	Quadro K2000M
G3D Mark Score	994	1,004+1%
Architecture	GCN 1.0	Kepler
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	384	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.6336 TFLOPS+11%	0.5722 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	16+100%
TMUs	24	32+33%
L1 Cache	96 KB+200%	32 KB
L2 Cache	256 KB	256 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon R7 A265	Quadro K2000M
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	AMD Anti-Lag	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Radeon R7 A265 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro K2000M has 2 GB. The Quadro K2000M offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.

Feature	Radeon R7 A265	Quadro K2000M
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	2 GB+300%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	256 KB	256 KB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (11_1) (Radeon R7 A265) vs 11.1 (11_0) (Quadro K2000M). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.

Feature	Radeon R7 A265	Quadro K2000M
DirectX	12 (11_1)+8%	11.1 (11_0)
Vulkan	1.1	1.2+9%
OpenGL	4.5	4.6+2%
Max Displays	2	4+100%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: VCE 1.0 (Radeon R7 A265) vs NVENC (Quadro K2000M). Decoder: UVD 4.0 vs PureVideo HD (VP5). Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Radeon R7 A265) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro K2000M).

Feature	Radeon R7 A265	Quadro K2000M
Encoder	VCE 1.0	NVENC
Decoder	UVD 4.0	PureVideo HD (VP5)
Codecs	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon R7 A265 draws 30W versus the Quadro K2000M's 55W — a 58.8% difference. The Radeon R7 A265 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R7 A265) vs 350W (Quadro K2000M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 80°C.

Feature	Radeon R7 A265	Quadro K2000M
TDP	30W-45%	55W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Slots	0	0
Temp (Load)	75-6%	80°C
Perf/Watt	33.1+81%	18.3

💰

Value Analysis

The Quadro K2000M costs 79.9% less ($119 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 6.7 (Radeon R7 A265) vs 33.5 (Quadro K2000M) — the Quadro K2000M offers 400% better value. The Radeon R7 A265 is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2012).