Review Index:
Feedback

NVIDIA Pascal Quadro Roundup - P2000, P3000, P5000 Tested

Author:
Manufacturer: NVIDIA

Overview

Since the launch of NVIDIA's Pascal architecture with the GTX 1070 and 1080 last May, we've taken a look at a lot of Pascal-based products, including the recent launch of the GTX 1080 Ti. By now, it is clear that Pascal has proven itself in a gaming context.

One frequent request we get about GPU coverage is to look at professional uses cases for these sort of devices. While gaming is still far and away the most common use for GPUs, things like high-quality rendering in industries like architecture, and new industries like deep learning can see vast benefits from acceleration by GPUs.

Today, we are taking a look at some of the latest NVIDIA Quadro GPUs on the market, the Quadro P2000, P4000, and P5000. 

View Full Size

Diving deep into the technical specs of these Pascal-based Quadro products and the AMD competitor we will be testing,  we find a wide range of compute capability, power consumption, and price.

  Quadro P2000 Quadro P4000 Quadro P5000 Radeon Pro Duo
Process 16nm 16nm 16nm 28nm
Code Name GP106 GP104 GP104 Fiji XT x 2
Shaders 1024 1792 2560 8192
Rated Clock Speed 1470 MHz (Boost) 1480 MHz (Boost) 1730 MHz (Boost) up to 1000 MHz
Memory Width 160-bit 256-bit 256-bit 4096-bit (HBM) x 2
Compute Perf (FP32) 3.0 TFLOPS 5.3 TFLOPS 8.9 TFLOPS 16.38 TFLOPS
Compute Perf (FP64) 1/32 FP32 1/32 FP32 1/32 FP 32 1/16 FP32
Frame Buffer 5GB 8GB 16GB 8GB (4GB x 2)
TDP 75W 105W 180W 350W
Street Price $599 $900 $2000 $800

The astute readers will notice similarities to the NVIDIA GeForce line of products as they take a look at these specifications.

Continue to read our roundup of 3 Pascal Quadro Graphics Cards

Based on the GP106 GPU, the Quadro P2000 is a close relative to the GTX 1060. Comparing the shader counts of the P2000 to the GTX 1060 3GB, we see that it has 128 fewer shaders and a slightly lower clock speed, but more memory available. Similarly, the Quadro P4000 can be compared to a GTX 1070 with 128 fewer shaders and a lower clock speed.

The Quadro P5000 however, has identical shader count and clock speed as the GTX 1080 but with double the memory capacity, typical of professional graphics cards that are often working on much larger datasets. 

View Full Size

Taking a look at the physical layout of these Quadro cards, we again see the clear product line delineation. 

View Full Size

The Quadro P2000 is a smaller video card than we usually take a look at. With a single-slot design and a length of just under 8", the tiny cooler and fan work to dissipate the maximum of 75W that this card can draw. Along the back of this single slot card, you find four full-size DisplayPort connectors, enabling up to four simultaneous displays to be run at the same time. The 75W TDP of the Quadro P2000 means that is completely bus powered, with no external power connection.

View Full Size

As you might expect, the Quadro P4000 is a longer video card than the P2000 coming in at 9.5". However, with specifications nearing the GTX 1070, I was surprised to see just a single slot cooler on this card. The blower-style cooler on this card exhausts through small vent holes on both the cooler and the backplane near the back of the cooler. This enables the P4000 to fit into smaller form factor workstations which you might be more likely to find in enterprise, as opposed to the mid or full tower gaming chassis that a product like the GTX 1070 is targeting.

View Full Size

Finally, we have the Quadro P5000 in a familiar looking form factor. You'll probably recognize the similarities between the design of the P5000 and the GTX 1080. As they share the same GPU, this is no surprise. However, the video outputs are a bit tweaked from the consumer GPU. Here you'll find 4 DisplayPort connectors and one Dual-Link DVI connector. 


April 5, 2017 | 08:43 PM - Posted by Ophelos

I wouldn't worry about these benchmarks, Since the Nvidia Pascal cards just came out,and AMD got the VEGA Pro cards coming out around June or so this year to replace there current WX line up.

April 5, 2017 | 08:55 PM - Posted by Tobi Ogunsanwo (not verified)

Really disingenuous to not include Radeon pro WX lineup but I guess you might not have had access to one.

April 5, 2017 | 09:08 PM - Posted by Ken Addison

We really would have liked to include them, but we haven't had our hands on them!

April 5, 2017 | 11:37 PM - Posted by jayden2002 (not verified)

You should mention this to avoid further bashing.

Great job, Ken.

April 6, 2017 | 01:49 AM - Posted by To avoid bashing... (not verified)

Yeah well... http://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-pro-wx-4100-and-wx-5100-workst...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-pro-wx-7100,4896-3.html They have been reviewed by others as early as December after a mid year launch. Meanwhile the quadros were announced 2 mo. ago. and are getting reviewed first here.

To avoid bashing get your hands on them and make a review. The quadros will probably still win on many things, no reason to use an old gen card.

April 6, 2017 | 01:59 AM - Posted by To avoid bashing... (2/2) (not verified)

WX7100 is ~$600 and performs like it.
http://hothardware.com/reviews/nvidia-quadro-p4000-and-p2000-pro-worksta...

It falls behind the P2000 in many tasks and then is close to the p5000 for openCL.

They simply aren't competitive this gen in anything other than price. and OpenCL performance.

April 6, 2017 | 09:47 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Hi Ken, at 26:58 in the PC Perspective Podcast #444 you mentioned that the Radeon Pro Duo uses the "Radeon Graphics Drivers," but AMD also supplies professional drivers for the Radeon Pro: http://support.amd.com/en-us/download/workstation?os=Windows%2010%20-%20...

Some professional applications require certified drivers to work properly, which may be why you got a few strange results in SPECviewperf12

April 6, 2017 | 10:56 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Yes AMD does provide the professional drivers so software developers can save money by getting the "Radeon Pro Duo" and using it to develop for production systems that use the more expensive Radeon Pro WX(Formally called FirePro) SKUs. But when benchmarking professional cards the review is not scientific and proper if the real professional GPUs are not tested against other real professional GPU SKUs.

Any real certification testing for prodction software will be done on the Radeon Pro WX professional SKUs(production certified) even if the software was developed using the Radeon Pro Duo(Just as a Low Cost development platform). So and final testing/certification and reviewing(Proper Reviewing) needs to be done on the Radeon Pro WX SKUs.

So if you can't test the latest Quadro SKUs against the latest Radeon Pro WX competition, why would a reviewer want to tarnish their reputation!

April 6, 2017 | 03:13 PM - Posted by Ken Addison

Interesting that AMD doesn't seem to surface the Pro driver link unless you dig for it. If you go to the AMD default driver site, the Radeon Pro Duo option brings you to download Radeon Software Crimson Edition ReLive

April 6, 2017 | 05:15 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

That's not going to help because the Radeon Pro WX SKUs may have more memory and other tweaks. If Nvidia has Quadros to offer for testing then Nvidia must have some Radeon Pro SKU samples also for research that it can offer to make for a more scientific/balanced testing run. There has to be more comparisons Apples to Apples or the testing should be done completely without any Radeon SKUs, unless those Radeon Pro WX samples can be had from either AMD or Nvidia.

April 5, 2017 | 09:41 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Yes, this kind of testing with professional GPUs against non professional GPU it's not going to go over well. Where is any Radeon Pro WX SKUs. The Radeon Pro duo is not more like the Titan X is for Nvidia with Quadro being Nvidia's professional line. So where are the Radeon Pro WX(Formally called Fire Pro) SKUs.

Very Disingenuous this "review" is.

April 5, 2017 | 09:52 PM - Posted by CNote

I haven't messed with 3dsMax since ~2004. I can only imagine how much nicer it runs one something faster than a GeForce4 ti 4200.

April 5, 2017 | 10:23 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Such a damn good, awesome, useful AF review. Finally, no peasanty AMD crap. Please, more stuff like this.

April 6, 2017 | 07:04 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I know really... Why even bother with this pro duo toy... At least those blue cards weren't there to sully the graphs.

April 6, 2017 | 01:18 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Damn, the pro duo is a beast in OpenCL and it's only $800. If I didn't have to upgrade my PSU for it, I'd probably buy it.

April 6, 2017 | 02:09 PM - Posted by Mr.Gold (not verified)

Anyone use those cards for professional real-time VR ? (stereo 3d)

It seem this would be easy now that headset are so easily available.
(Specially in term of CAD / modeling / Architecture)

On another note, VR gaming I wonder how the duo perform VS a GTX 1080 ti. It seem trivial for driver to render the same frame in parallel. Its near 100% scaling.

But I heard very little on sli/crossfire and VR...

April 7, 2017 | 01:31 PM - Posted by Zer0k (not verified)

I'm curious why you didn't include results for the 1060/1070/1080/1080ti.

You reference them on the first page, and I'm sure many readers would love to know what sort of performance the much cheaper retail cards :)

April 9, 2017 | 01:30 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Nvidia only issues the certified professional drivers for their professional line of cards. Wow it could work on the consumer cards, nvidia does not allow it.

April 21, 2017 | 01:28 AM - Posted by Uniblaab2

Quote:"And for these consumers, the price increase is worth it".

I think that you are thinking about years ago when you put this line in. Upwards from the performance of the 1060 maybe but from the performance of the 1070 upwards to the titan series, if a $800 card could compete with the more expensive consumer cards, a lot of us would consider the price. Yeah, there are some seriously more expensive pro-cards, but if this set could better consumer cards at these prices, it would be a win.

I remember some time ago when it was possible to flash a certain consumer card and make it a pro-card, but performance was not quite the same. So the best (todays) consumer card will be better than a pro card even if it would run everyday software, games especially.

Seems like a broken tenet where a pro isnt as good as the peoples....unless you are are of a few that has the few games that run entirely on opencl

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.