NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
We compared two Professional market GPUs: 256MB VRAM Quadro FX 380 and 2GB VRAM Quadro K2000D to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 's Advantages
Lower TDP (34W vs 51W)
NVIDIA Quadro K2000D 's Advantages
Released 4 years late
More VRAM (2GB vs 256GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (64.00GB/s vs 22.40GB/s)
368 additional rendering cores
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
Quadro FX 380
0.035 TFLOPS
Quadro K2000D
+1994%
0.733 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Mar 2009
Release Date
Mar 2013
Quadro FX
Generation
Quadro
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 2.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 2.0 x16
Clock Speeds
-
-
-
-
-
-
700 MHz
Memory Clock
1000 MHz
Memory
256MB
Memory Size
2GB
GDDR3
Memory Type
GDDR5
128bit
Memory Bus
128bit
22.40GB/s
Bandwidth
64.00GB/s
Render Config
-
-
-
2
SM Count
-
16
Shading Units
384
8
TMUs
32
8
ROPs
16
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
L1 Cache
16 KB (per SMX)
32 KB
L2 Cache
256 KB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
3.600 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
7.632 GPixel/s
3.600 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
30.53 GTexel/s
-
-
-
35.20 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
732.7 GFLOPS
-
FP64 (double)
30.53 GFLOPS
Board Design
34W
TDP
51W
200 W
Suggested PSU
250 W
2x DVI
Outputs
2x DVI
1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2
None
Power Connectors
None
Graphics Processor
G96
GPU Name
GK107
-
GPU Variant
GK107-301-A2
Tesla
Architecture
Kepler
UMC
Foundry
TSMC
65 nm
Process Size
28 nm
0.314 billion
Transistors
1.27 billion
144 mm²
Die Size
118 mm²
Graphics Features
11.1 (10_0)
DirectX
12 (11_0)
3.3
OpenGL
4.6
1.1
OpenCL
3.0
N/A
Vulkan
1.1
1.1
CUDA
3.0
4.0
Shader Model
5.1
