Radeon R9 M275X vs Quadro K2000D
Radeon R9 M275X
Popular choices:
Quadro K2000D
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 Radeon R9 M275X is positioned at rank 460 and the Quadro K2000D is on rank 257, so the Quadro K2000D offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R9 M275X
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K2000D
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R9 M275X is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.9% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro K2000D offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M275X | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro K2000D offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro K2000D holds the technical lead. Priced at $35 (vs $300), it costs 88% less, resulting in a 740.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M275X | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+740.9%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300) | ✅More affordable ($35) |
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 Radeon R9 M275X and Quadro K2000D
Radeon R9 M275X
The Radeon R9 M275X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 28 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 900 MHz to 925 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,631 points.
Quadro K2000D
The Quadro K2000D is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 1 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 954 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 51W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,600 points. Launch price was $599.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 M275X scores 1,631 and the Quadro K2000D reaches 1,600 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 M275X is built on GCN 1.0 while the Quadro K2000D uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 640 (Radeon R9 M275X) vs 384 (Quadro K2000D). Raw compute: 1.184 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M275X) vs 0.7327 TFLOPS (Quadro K2000D).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275X | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,631+2% | 1,600 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 640+67% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.184 TFLOPS+62% | 0.7327 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 40+25% | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB+400% | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275X | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| 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 R9 M275X comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro K2000D has 2 GB. The Quadro K2000D offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275X | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| 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_0 (Radeon R9 M275X) vs 12 (11_0) (Quadro K2000D). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275X | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12_0 | 12 (11_0) |
| Max Displays | 0 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 M275X) vs NVENC 1st Gen (Quadro K2000D). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs NVDEC 1st Gen.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275X | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 2.0 | NVENC 1st Gen |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | NVDEC 1st Gen |
| Codecs | — | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 M275X draws 75W versus the Quadro K2000D's 51W — a 38.1% difference. The Quadro K2000D is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R9 M275X) vs 350W (Quadro K2000D). Power connectors: Mobile vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 1mm vs 202mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275X | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 51W-32% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Mobile | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 1mm | 202mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 21.7 | 31.4+45% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 M275X launched at $300 MSRP and currently averages $300, while the Quadro K2000D launched at $599 and now averages $35. The Quadro K2000D costs 88.3% less ($265 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 5.4 (Radeon R9 M275X) vs 45.7 (Quadro K2000D) — the Quadro K2000D offers 746.3% better value. The Radeon R9 M275X is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2013).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M275X | Quadro K2000D |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $300-50% | $599 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $300 | $35-88% |
| Performance per Dollar | 5.4 | 45.7+746% |
| Codename | Venus | GK107 |
| Release | January 28 2014 | March 1 2013 |
| Ranking | #746 | #750 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R9 M275X and Quadro K2000D
