Radeon RX 570 vs Quadro T2000 Max-Q

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.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro T2000 Max-Q

#1

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

127%

#2

Quadro T2000 Max-Q

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The Quadro T2000 Max-Q uses modern memory architecture. The Quadro T2000 Max-Q likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon RX 570 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon RX 570 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro T2000 Max-Q.

Insight	Radeon RX 570	Quadro T2000 Max-Q
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+0.1%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.1%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020))	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	✨ FSR 3 / AFMF Support	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon RX 570 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

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 RX 570 Benchmark Check

Quadro T2000 Max-Q Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon RX 570 and Quadro T2000 Max-Q

Radeon RX 570

The Radeon RX 570 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 18 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1168 MHz to 1244 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 120W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,967 points. Launch price was $169.

Quadro T2000 Max-Q

The Quadro T2000 Max-Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1200 MHz to 1620 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 40W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,959 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Radeon RX 570 scores 6,967 and the Quadro T2000 Max-Q reaches 6,959 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon RX 570 is built on GCN 4.0 while the Quadro T2000 Max-Q uses Turing, both on 14 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (Radeon RX 570) vs 1,024 (Quadro T2000 Max-Q). Raw compute: 5.095 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 570) vs 3.318 TFLOPS (Quadro T2000 Max-Q). Boost clocks: 1244 MHz vs 1620 MHz.

Feature	Radeon RX 570	Quadro T2000 Max-Q
G3D Mark Score	6,967	6,959
Architecture	GCN 4.0	Turing
Process Node	14 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	2048+100%	1024
Compute (TFLOPS)	5.095 TFLOPS+54%	3.318 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1244 MHz	1620 MHz+30%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	128+100%	64
L1 Cache	0.5 MB	1 MB+100%
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon RX 570	Quadro T2000 Max-Q
Upscaling Tech	FSR 2.1	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	FSR 3 (Compatible)	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	AMD Anti-Lag	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Radeon RX 570) vs 1 MB (Quadro T2000 Max-Q) — the Radeon RX 570 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Radeon RX 570	Quadro T2000 Max-Q
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	256-bit	256-bit
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (Radeon RX 570) vs 12.1 (Quadro T2000 Max-Q). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 5 vs 4.

Feature	Radeon RX 570	Quadro T2000 Max-Q
DirectX	12	12.1
Vulkan	1.3	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	5+25%	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: VCE 3.4 (Radeon RX 570) vs NVENC 7.0 (Quadro T2000 Max-Q). Decoder: UVD 6.3 vs PureVideo HD VP9. Supported codecs: H.265,H.264 (Radeon RX 570) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro T2000 Max-Q).

Feature	Radeon RX 570	Quadro T2000 Max-Q
Encoder	VCE 3.4	NVENC 7.0
Decoder	UVD 6.3	PureVideo HD VP9
Codecs	H.265,H.264	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon RX 570 draws 120W versus the Quadro T2000 Max-Q's 40W — a 100% difference. The Quadro T2000 Max-Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 450W (Radeon RX 570) vs 350W (Quadro T2000 Max-Q). Power connectors: 8-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 241mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.

Feature	Radeon RX 570	Quadro T2000 Max-Q
TDP	120W	40W-67%
Recommended PSU	450W	350W-22%
Power Connector	8-pin	PCIe-powered
Length	241mm	0mm
Height	120mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	75	—
Perf/Watt	58.1	174.0+199%