Quadro M2000 vs R9 Fury X
Head-to-head specifications
| Metric | Quadro M2000 | R9 Fury X | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3DMark Time Spy | 626 | 3,010 | -79.2% |
| Avg FPS @ 1080p | 24 | 40 | -40.0% |
| Avg FPS @ 1440p | 12 | 23 | -47.8% |
| Avg FPS @ 4K | 6 | 12 | -50.0% |
| FP32 compute (TFLOPS) | 1.8 | 8.6 | -79.2% |
| VRAM | 4 GB GDDR5 | 4 GB HBM | — |
| Memory bandwidth (GB/s) | 112 | 512 | -78.1% |
| TDP (W) | 75 | 275 | — |
| Launch MSRP (USD) | $550 | $649 | -15.3% |
- R9 Fury X averages 23 fps at 1440p versus 12 fps — about 48% faster.
- Quadro M2000 draws less power (75W vs 275W).
Verdict: Quadro M2000 or R9 Fury X?
Quadro M2000 advantages
- Power efficiency (+73%)
- Affordability (+15%)
R9 Fury X advantages
- 1440p gaming (+48%)
- 4K gaming (+50%)
- Synthetic benchmark performance (+79%)
- Memory bandwidth (+78%)
Which should you choose?
- Choose the Quadro M2000 if you want lower power draw, heat and noise.
- Choose the R9 Fury X if you game at 1440p.
- Choose the Quadro M2000 if you want the better price for the performance.
Value for money
R9 Fury X delivers more performance per dollar, making it the better value of the two at their listed prices.
Quadro M2000 vs R9 Fury X: which should you choose?
Quadro M2000 — NVIDIA desktop graphics card (2016, Maxwell) with 4 GB of GDDR5, averaging 12 fps at 1440p; launched at $550.
R9 Fury X — AMD desktop graphics card (2015, GCN 3.0) with 4 GB of HBM, averaging 23 fps at 1440p; launched at $649.
Quadro M2000 vs R9 Fury X: R9 Fury X is faster for gaming. R9 Fury X averages 23 fps at 1440p versus 12 fps — about 48% faster. Quadro M2000 draws less power (75W vs 275W).
1080p, 1440p and 4K
At 1440p — the most common enthusiast resolution — the R9 Fury X averages 23 fps against 12. At 4K (6 vs 12 fps) VRAM (4GB vs 4GB) and memory bandwidth matter more.
Power and value
Board power is 75 W versus 275 W, which affects PSU headroom, case cooling and noise. At launch MSRPs of $550 vs $649, weigh the frame-rate lead against price and power draw for your target resolution.
The verdict
Both are credible choices in the graphics card comparison space; the specification table above lays out every metric so you can weigh the trade-offs that matter to you. Pick the one whose strengths line up with how you will actually use it.
Frequently asked questions
Is the Quadro M2000 better than the R9 Fury X?
R9 Fury X takes the overall edge, though Quadro M2000 wins in specific areas worth weighing. R9 Fury X averages 23 fps at 1440p versus 12 fps — about 48% faster.
What is the main difference between the Quadro M2000 and the R9 Fury X?
R9 Fury X averages 23 fps at 1440p versus 12 fps — about 48% faster. Quadro M2000 draws less power (75W vs 275W).
Which is better value?
R9 Fury X delivers more performance per dollar, making it the better value of the two at their listed prices.
Which should I choose?
Choose the Quadro M2000 if you want lower power draw, heat and noise. Choose the R9 Fury X if you game at 1440p.
Methodology
Graphics cards are compared on 3DMark Time Spy scores, average gaming frame rates at 1080p/1440p/4K, FP32 compute throughput, VRAM capacity and type, memory bandwidth, board power (TDP) and launch MSRP — plus AI workload throughput (Stable Diffusion iterations/s and local LLM tokens/s) where measured. Vintage and server GPUs without modern benchmark results are compared on specifications only, clearly labelled. Frame rates are averages across a game suite at high settings; specific titles vary.