Notebookcheck Logo

NVIDIA RTX 3500 Ada Generation Laptop GPU vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000M

NVIDIA RTX 3500 Ada Generation Laptop GPU

► remove from comparison NVIDIA NVIDIA RTX 3500 Ada Generation Laptop GPU

The Nvidia RTX 3500 Ada Generation is a higher-end professional graphics card for use in laptops that sports 5,120 CUDA cores and 12 GB of ECC GDDR6 VRAM. Brought into existence in 2023, this graphics adapter leverages TSMC's 5 nm process and Nvidia's Ada Lovelace architecture to achieve higher-than-average performance combined with moderate power consumption. The Nvidia-recommended TGP range for the card is very wide at 60 W to 140 W leading to bizarre performance differences between different systems powered by what is supposed to be the same product.

Hardware-wise, the RTX 3500 is a cut-down GeForce RTX 4070 Desktop, as far as we can tell. Consequently, both make use of the AD104 chip and have little difficulty running triple-A games at QHD 1440p.

Quadro series graphics cards ship with a different BIOS and drivers than GeForce cards and are targeted at professional users rather than gaming. Commercial product design, large-scale calculations, simulation, data mining, 24 x 7 operation, certified drivers - if any of this sounds familiar, then a Quadro card will make you happy.

Architecture and Features

Ada Lovelace brings a range of improvements over older graphics cards utilizing the outgoing Ampere architecture. It's not just a better manufacturing process and a higher number of CUDA cores that we have here (up to 16,384 versus 10,752); under-the-hood refinements are plentiful, including an immensely larger L2 cache, an optimized ray tracing routine (a different wat to determine what is transparent and what isn't is used), and other changes. Naturally, these graphics cards can both encode and decode some of the most widely used video codecs, AVC, HEVC and AV1 included; they also support a host of Nvidia technologies, including Optimus and DLSS 3, and they can certainly be used for various AI tasks.

The RTX 3500 Ada features 40 RT cores of the 3rd generation, 160 Tensor cores of the 4th generation and 5,120 CUDA cores. Multiply those numbers by 1.15 and what you get looks exactly like a desktop RTX 4070: 46, 184 and 5,888, respectively. Elsewhere, the graphics card comes with 12 GB of 192-bit wide ECC GDDR6 memory for a very healthy throughput of ~432 GB/s. Error correction can be turned off if desired. The fact that error correction is present here proves that the RTX 3500 Ada is indeed targeted at professional users.

Just like Ampere-based cards, the RTX 3500 makes use of the PCI-Express 4 protocol. 8K SUHD monitors are supported, however, DP 1.4a video outputs may prove to be a bottleneck down the line.

Performance

While we have not tested a single system featuring an RTX 3500 Ada Generation as of February 2024, we have plenty of performance data for the RTX 4070 Desktop, a graphics card that's about 20% superior to the RTX 3500 Ada Generation. Based on that, we fully expect the RTX 3500 to deliver:

  • a Blender 3.3 Classroom CUDA score of around 32 seconds
  • a 3DMark 11 GPU score of around 44,000
  • around 90 fps in GTA V (1440p - Highest settings possible, 16x AF, 4x MSAA, FXAA)
  • around 50 fps in Cyberpunk 2077 (1440p - High settings, Ultra RT, "Quality" DLSS)

Nvidia's marketing materials mention "up to 23 TFLOPS" of performance, a 15% improvement over 20 TFLOPS delivered by the RTX 3000 Ada Generation.

Your mileage may vary depending on how competent the cooling solution of your laptop is and how high the TGP power target of the RTX 3500 is. One other thing worth mentioning is that enabling error correction appears to reduce the amount of video memory that is available to applications and games by up to a gigabyte.

Power consumption

Nvidia no longer divides its laptop graphics cards into Max-Q and non-max-Q models. Instead, laptop makers are free to set the TGP according to their needs, and the range can sometimes be shockingly wide. This is the case for the RTX 3500, as the lowest value recommended for it sits at just 60 W while the highest is more than two times higher at 140 W (this most likely includes Dynamic Boost). The slowest system built around an RTX 3500 Ada can easily be 60% slower than the fastest one. This is the kind of delta that we've been seeing on consumer-grade laptops featuring the latest GeForce RTX cards.

Last but not the least, the improved 5 nm process (TSMC 4N) the RTX 3500 is built with makes for very decent energy efficiency, as of mid 2023.

NVIDIA Quadro 2000M

► remove from comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000M is a professional workstation graphics card based on the Fermi architecture (likely the GF104 or GF106). It offers the same amount of shaders like the GeForce GTX 460M, but only a 128 Bit memory bus for DDR3 memory. The slow DDR3 memory in particular could be a bottleneck to the GPU

The Quadro series offers certified drivers that are optimized for stability and performance in professional applications like CAD, DCC, medicine, or visualisation areas. OpenGL performance, for example, should be significantly better than GeForce graphics cards of similar specifications.

The shader/CUDA cores can be accessed using DirectX 11 or OpenGL 4.1 for graphics rendering and DirectCompute, OpenCL, AXE, and CUDA for general purpose calculations. Due to the new Fermi core, the 2000M should offer high performance in general purpose calculations.

Furthermore, the Nvidia Quadro 2000M is compatible with the new stereoscopic solution by Nvidia, NVIDIA 3D Vision Pro.

To automatically switch between the processor graphics card and the Quadro, the 2000M supports Nvidia Optimus. The implementation of the technology into specific notebook models is dependent on the laptop vendor.

The Quadro 2000M is specified at 55 Watt TDP and is therefore best suited for 15.6" or greater laptops.

NVIDIA RTX 3500 Ada Generation Laptop GPUNVIDIA Quadro 2000M
Quadro M Series
NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation Laptop GPU compare 9728 @ 0.93 - 1.68 GHz256 Bit @ 20000 MHz
NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Laptop GPU compare 7424 192 Bit @ 16000 MHz
NVIDIA RTX 3500 Ada Generation Laptop GPU 5120 192 Bit @ 16000 MHz
NVIDIA RTX 3000 Ada Generation Laptop GPU compare 4608 128 Bit @ 16000 MHz
NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation Laptop GPU compare 3072 128 Bit @ 16000 MHz
Nvidia RTX 1000 Ada Generation Laptop GPU compare 2560 96 Bit @ 16000 MHz
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Laptop GPU compare 2048 64 Bit @ 12000 MHz
Quadro M5500 compare 2048 @ 1.14 - 1.14 GHz256 Bit @ 6606 MHz
Quadro M5000M compare 1536 @ 0.96 - 1.05 GHz256 Bit @ 5000 MHz
Quadro M4000M compare 1280 @ 0.98 - 1.01 GHz256 Bit @ 5012 MHz
Quadro M3000M compare 1024 @ 1.05 GHz256 Bit @ 5000 MHz
Quadro M2200 compare 1024 @ 0.69 - 1.04 GHz128 Bit @ 5508 MHz
Quadro M1200 compare 640 @ 0.99 - 1.15 GHz128 Bit @ 5000 MHz
Quadro M2000M compare 640 @ 1.04 - 1.2 GHz128 Bit @ 5000 MHz
Quadro M1000M compare 512 @ 0.99 - 1.07 GHz128 Bit @ 5000 MHz
Quadro M620 compare 512 @ 1.02 GHz128 Bit @ 5012 MHz
Quadro 5010M compare 384 @ 0.45 GHz256 Bit @ 1300 MHz
Quadro 4000M compare 336 @ 0.48 GHz256 Bit @ 1200 MHz
Quadro M520 compare 384 @ 0.76 - 1.02 GHz64 Bit
Quadro M600M compare 384 @ 0.84 - 0.88 GHz128 Bit @ 5012 MHz
Quadro M500M compare 384 @ 1.03 - 1.12 GHz64 Bit @ 4004 MHz
Quadro 5000M compare 320 @ 0.41 GHz256 Bit @ 1200 MHz
Quadro 3000M compare 240 @ 0.45 GHz256 Bit @ 625 MHz
Quadro 2000M 192 @ 0.55 GHz128 Bit @ 900 MHz
Quadro 1000M compare 96 @ 0.7 GHz128 Bit @ 900 MHz
ArchitectureAda LovelaceFermi
Pipelines5120 - unified192 - unified
Raytracing Cores40
Tensor / AI Cores160
Theoretical Performance23 TFLOPS FP32
Memory Speed16000 effective = 2000 MHz900 MHz
Memory Bus Width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory TypeGDDR6DDR3
Max. Amount of Memory12 GB2048 MB
Shared Memorynono
Memory Bandwidth432 GB/s
APIDirectX 12 Ultimate, Shader 6.7, OpenGL 4.6, OpenCL 3.0, Vulkan 1.3DirectX 11, Shader 5.0
Power Consumption115 Watt (60 - 115 Watt TGP)55 Watt
technology5 nm40 nm
PCIe4.0 x16
Displays4 Displays (max.), HDMI 2.1, DisplayPort 1.4a
Notebook Sizelargemedium sized
Date of Announcement21.03.2023 22.02.2011
Link to Manufacturer Pageimages.nvidia.com
PredecessorRTX A3000 Laptop GPU
CodenameFermi
Core Speed550 MHz
Shader Speed1100 MHz
FeaturesOpenGl 4.1, FP32

Benchmarks

3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance Score
min: 1416     avg: 1422     median: 1421 (2%)     max: 1428 Points
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance GPU
min: 1259     avg: 1261     median: 1261 (1%)     max: 1263 Points
3DMark Vantage
3DM Vant. Perf. total + NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. total
min: 6608     avg: 6634     median: 6633.5 (2%)     max: 6659 Points
3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX + NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX
min: 5391     avg: 5411     median: 5410.5 (3%)     max: 5430 Points
3DMark 05 - 3DMark 05 - Standard
21287 Points (23%)
3DMark 06 3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 + NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
3DMark 06
min: 11575     avg: 11659     median: 11656 (15%)     max: 11747 Points
Unigine Heaven 2.1 - Heaven 2.1 high
min: 14.1     avg: 17     median: 17 (3%)     max: 19.8 fps
SPECviewperf 11
specvp11 snx-01 + NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 snx-01
min: 19.28     avg: 19.3     median: 19.3 (12%)     max: 19.32 fps
specvp11 tcvis-02 + NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 tcvis-02
min: 22.13     avg: 22.3     median: 22.3 (13%)     max: 22.52 fps
specvp11 sw-02 + NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 sw-02
min: 32.8     avg: 33.1     median: 33.1 (25%)     max: 33.4 fps
specvp11 proe-05 + NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 proe-05
min: 9.45     avg: 9.6     median: 9.6 (11%)     max: 9.83 fps
specvp11 maya-03 + NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 maya-03
min: 45.28     avg: 45.6     median: 45.6 (34%)     max: 45.96 fps
specvp11 lightwave-01 + NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 lightwave-01
min: 40.8     avg: 41.9     median: 41.9 (45%)     max: 42.93 fps
specvp11 ensight-04 + NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 ensight-04
min: 17.84     avg: 17.9     median: 17.9 (9%)     max: 17.96 fps
specvp11 catia-03 + NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 catia-03
min: 27.08     avg: 27.4     median: 27.4 (14%)     max: 27.69 fps
Windows 7 Experience Index - Win7 Gaming graphics
6.9 Points (87%)
Windows 7 Experience Index - Win7 Graphics
6.9 Points (87%)
Cinebench R10 Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit) + NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit)
5671 Points (4%)
Cinebench R11.5 Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64 Bit + NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64 Bit
min: 38.3     avg: 38.4     median: 38.4 (13%)     max: 38.44 fps

Average Benchmarks NVIDIA Quadro 2000M → 0% n=

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Game Benchmarks

The following benchmarks stem from our benchmarks of review laptops. The performance depends on the used graphics memory, clock rate, processor, system settings, drivers, and operating systems. So the results don't have to be representative for all laptops with this GPU. For detailed information on the benchmark results, click on the fps number.

low 800x600
Quadro 2000M:
86.7  fps
med. 1024x768
Quadro 2000M:
75  fps
high 1360x768
Quadro 2000M:
71.7  fps
ultra 1920x1080
Quadro 2000M:
41.7  fps
Fifa 11

Fifa 11

2010
high 1360x768
Quadro 2000M:
92  fps
ultra 1920x1080
Quadro 2000M:
59  fps
Mafia 2

Mafia 2

2010
low 800x600
Quadro 2000M:
92  fps
med. 1024x768
Quadro 2000M:
71  fps
high 1360x768
Quadro 2000M:
59.1  fps
ultra 1920x1080
Quadro 2000M:
35.1  fps
low 1024x768
Quadro 2000M:
165 243 ~ 204 fps
med. 1360x768
Quadro 2000M:
82  fps
high 1360x768
Quadro 2000M:
45  fps
ultra 1920x1080
Quadro 2000M:
23 37 ~ 30 fps
med. 1366x768
Quadro 2000M:
64.6  fps
high 1366x768
Quadro 2000M:
46.9  fps
ultra 1920x1080
Quadro 2000M:
22.8  fps
low 800x600
Quadro 2000M:
200.3  fps
med. 1024x768
Quadro 2000M:
74.8  fps
high 1366x768
Quadro 2000M:
59.5  fps
ultra 1920x1080
Quadro 2000M:
37.6  fps
Anno 1404

Anno 1404

2009
low 1024x768
Quadro 2000M:
62  fps
ultra 1280x1024
Quadro 2000M:
36 43 ~ 40 fps
Sims 3

Sims 3

2009
low 800x600
Quadro 2000M:
269  fps
med. 1024x768
Quadro 2000M:
93  fps
high 1280x1024
Quadro 2000M:
47.9  fps
NVIDIA Quadro 2000Mlowmed.highultraQHD4K
Call of Duty: Black Ops86.77571.741.7
Fifa 119259
Mafia 2927159.135.1
StarCraft 2204824530
Battlefield: Bad Company 264.646.922.8
CoD Modern Warfare 2200.374.859.537.6
Anno 14046240
Sims 32699347.89
< 30 fps
< 60 fps
< 120 fps
≥ 120 fps


3
3


6

5
2
1
6







For more games that might be playable and a list of all games and graphics cards visit our Gaming List

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2024, 2023
v1.28
log 04. 17:25:02

#0 checking url part for id 11605 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 2435 +0s ... 0s

#2 redirected to Ajax server, took 1720106702 +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Thu, 04 Jul 2024 05:15:44 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#4 composed specs +0.03s ... 0.031s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.031s

#6 start showIntegratedCPUs +0s ... 0.031s

#7 getting avg benchmarks for device 11605 +0.01s ... 0.04s

#8 got single benchmarks 11605 +0s ... 0.04s

#9 getting avg benchmarks for device 2435 +0s ... 0.041s

#10 got single benchmarks 2435 +0.001s ... 0.041s

#11 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.041s

#12 min, max, avg, median took s +0.005s ... 0.046s

#13 before gaming benchmark output +0s ... 0.046s

#14 Got 29 rows for game benchmarks. +0.002s ... 0.049s

#15 composed SQL query for gamebenchmarks +0s ... 0.049s

#16 got data and put it in $dataArray +0s ... 0.049s

#17 benchmarks composed for output. +0.003s ... 0.052s

#18 calculated avg scores. +0s ... 0.052s

#19 return log +0.002s ... 0.053s

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Benchmarks / Tech > Graphics Card Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2023-07- 1)