Home GPU Comparison NVIDIA Quadro 2000D vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Passive

NVIDIA Quadro 2000D vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Passive

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 1024MB VRAM Quadro 2000D and 24GB VRAM Quadro RTX 6000 Passive to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.

Main Differences

NVIDIA Quadro 2000D 's Advantages
Lower TDP (62W vs 260W)
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Passive 's Advantages
Released 6 years and 10 months late
Boost Clock1560MHz
More VRAM (24GB vs 1024GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (672.0GB/s vs 41.60GB/s)
4416 additional rendering cores

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Quadro 2000D
0.48 TFLOPS
Quadro RTX 6000 Passive +2895%
14.38 TFLOPS
VS

Graphics Card

Oct 2011
Release Date
Aug 2018
Quadro
Generation
Quadro
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 2.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 3.0 x16

Clock Speeds

-
Base Clock
1305 MHz
-
Boost Clock
1560 MHz
650 MHz
Memory Clock
1750 MHz

Memory

1024MB
Memory Size
24GB
GDDR5
Memory Type
GDDR6
128bit
Memory Bus
384bit
41.60GB/s
Bandwidth
672.0GB/s

Render Config

-
-
-
4
SM Count
72
192
Shading Units
4608
32
TMUs
288
16
ROPs
96
-
Tensor Cores
576
-
RT Cores
72
64 KB (per SM)
L1 Cache
64 KB (per SM)
256 KB
L2 Cache
6 MB
-
-
-

Theoretical Performance

5.000 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
149.8 GPixel/s
20.00 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
449.3 GTexel/s
-
FP16 (half)
28.75 TFLOPS
480.0 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
14.38 TFLOPS
40.00 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
449.3 GFLOPS

Board Design

62W
TDP
260W
250 W
Suggested PSU
600 W
2x DVI
Outputs
No outputs
None
Power Connectors
1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

Graphics Processor

GF106
GPU Name
TU102
GF106-875-KA-A1
GPU Variant
TU102-875-A1
Fermi
Architecture
Turing
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
40 nm
Process Size
12 nm
1.17 billion
Transistors
18.6 billion
238 mm²
Die Size
754 mm²

Graphics Features

12 (11_0)
DirectX
12 Ultimate (12_2)
4.6
OpenGL
4.6
1.1
OpenCL
3.0
N/A
Vulkan
1.3
2.1
CUDA
7.5
5.1
Shader Model
6.6

Related GPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy