Home Comparison Quadro M2000 vs Quadro NVS 440 PCIe x16

Quadro M2000 vs Quadro NVS 440 PCIe x16

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 4GB VRAM Quadro M2000 and 48GB VRAM Quadro NVS 440 PCIe x16 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.

Main Differences

Quadro M2000 's Advantages
Lower TDP (75W vs 295W)
Quadro NVS 440 PCIe x16 's Advantages
Released 7 years late
Boost Clock has increased by 115% (2495MHz vs 1163MHz)
More VRAM (48GB vs 4GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (864.0GB/s vs 105.8GB/s)
5376 additional rendering cores

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Quadro M2000
1786
Quadro NVS 440 PCIe x16 +3333%
61320
VS

Graphics Card

Apr 2016
Release Date
Apr 2023
Quadro
Generation
Radeon Pro Navi
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 3.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 4.0 x16

Clock Speeds

796 MHz
Base Clock
1855 MHz
1163 MHz
Boost Clock
2495 MHz
1653 MHz
Memory Clock
2250 MHz

Memory

4GB
Memory Size
48GB
GDDR5
Memory Type
GDDR6
128bit
Memory Bus
384bit
105.8GB/s
Bandwidth
864.0GB/s

Render Config

-
Compute Units
96
768
Shading Units
6144
48
TMUs
384
32
ROPs
192
-
RT Cores
96
48 KB (per SMM)
L1 Cache
256 KB per Array
1024 KB
L2 Cache
6 MB
-
L3 Cache
96 MB

Theoretical Performance

37.22 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
479.0 GPixel/s
55.82 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
958.1 GTexel/s
-
FP16 (half)
122.6 TFLOPS
1.786 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
61.32 TFLOPS
55.82 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
1.916 TFLOPS

Board Design

75W
TDP
295W
250 W
Suggested PSU
600 W
4x DisplayPort 1.4a
Outputs
3x DisplayPort 2.1 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1
None
Power Connectors
2x 8-pin

Graphics Processor

GM206
GPU Name
Navi 31
GM206-875-A1
GPU Variant
Navi 31
Maxwell 2.0
Architecture
RDNA 3.0
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
28 nm
Process Size
5 nm
2.94 billion
Transistors
57.7 billion
228 mm²
Die Size
529 mm²

Graphics Features

12 (12_1)
DirectX
12 Ultimate (12_2)
4.6
OpenGL
4.6
3.0
OpenCL
2.2
1.3
Vulkan
1.3
5.2
CUDA
-
6.4
Shader Model
6.7

Related CPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy