Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Quadro vs Geforce?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 4, 2013 10:14:35 PM

The Thinkpad laptop I'm considering purchasing only has NVIDIA Quadro k1000M & 2000 as options. The games I want to play all suggest Geforce3 or better. How does Quadro compare to Geforce? Can Quadro 1000 play runescape 3 (an update that will soon happen) on high graphics? I also want to be able to play diablo 3, and I want a video card that won't become too out of date over the next 4 years.

More about : quadro geforce

May 4, 2013 10:17:54 PM

Geforce is for gaming so since ur going to be gaming id go with it. Theres also amd radeon which is also made for gaming. What is your budget on the graphics card?
m
0
l
May 4, 2013 10:19:19 PM

DO NOT get a Quadro for gaming, they are more expensive because of workload optimized drivers. Think of them as bulldozers, but we need porches for gaming.
m
0
l
Related resources
May 4, 2013 10:19:35 PM

For gaming: GeForce.
For a workstation: Quadro.

Quadro doesn't play games as well as GeForce, but it can do heavy graphics rendering a whole lot better (in say 3D MAX, Maya, etc) than GeForce.
m
0
l
May 4, 2013 10:22:19 PM

SprinkleOwnz said:
Geforce is for gaming so since ur going to be gaming id go with it. Theres also amd radeon which is also made for gaming. What is your budget on the graphics card?


Well if I'm getting the Thinkpad option I'm looking at, then my only options are between Quadro 1000 and Quadro 2000 which is a $250 difference. The games I want to play all suggest Geforce3 or higher. And I don't know how those stack up. Could a game suggesting Geforce 3 be easily playable on a Quadro 1000? Or should I spend $250 extra to get Quadro 2000? Or will Quadro just not cut it at all?
m
0
l
May 4, 2013 10:23:14 PM

Novuake said:
DO NOT get a Quadro for gaming, they are more expensive because of workload optimized drivers. Think of them as bulldozers, but we need porches for gaming.


Gaming isn't my primary purpose for the computer, but I'd like to keep some gaming as an option.
m
0
l
May 4, 2013 10:28:35 PM

ksham said:
For gaming: GeForce.
For a workstation: Quadro.

Quadro doesn't play games as well as GeForce, but it can do heavy graphics rendering a whole lot better (in say 3D MAX, Maya, etc) than GeForce.


I suppose I should have worded my title or question better. What I really want to know is how does Quadro 1000 compare to Quadro 2000. Is it worth the extra $250? The games I want to play suggest Geforce3 or better, and I don't know enough to figure out if a Quadro 1000 can handle that, or if upgrading to Quadro 2000 would mean it could handle that, or if a Quadro just won't cut it at all?
m
0
l
May 4, 2013 10:33:22 PM

Alexandern said:
ksham said:
For gaming: GeForce.
For a workstation: Quadro.

Quadro doesn't play games as well as GeForce, but it can do heavy graphics rendering a whole lot better (in say 3D MAX, Maya, etc) than GeForce.


I suppose I should have worded my title or question better. What I really want to know is how does Quadro 1000 compare to Quadro 2000. Is it worth the extra $250? The games I want to play suggest Geforce3 or better, and I don't know enough to figure out if a Quadro 1000 can handle that, or if upgrading to Quadro 2000 would mean it could handle that, or if a Quadro just won't cut it at all?


The Quadro 1000 and 2000 are both low end GPUs meant for workstations. BUT they can run some games. To be honest if you do not do find anything that needs a Quadro card then Geforce is ALWAYS a better option.
m
0
l
May 4, 2013 10:35:01 PM

Both the Quadro 1000 and Quadro 2000 are not great at gaming. Either one can play the games you mentioned but just not at max or ultra setting. There will be some lag and FPS won't be 60. But they will be playable enough. The Quadro 2000 will be a bit better. I wouldn't say that it's worth the extra $250. Again, both cards aren't really made for gaming so in terms of gaming, I wouldn't spend $250 on the upgrade. In terms of graphics rendering, I'd say yes.
m
0
l
May 4, 2013 10:35:30 PM

Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
ksham said:
For gaming: GeForce.
For a workstation: Quadro.

Quadro doesn't play games as well as GeForce, but it can do heavy graphics rendering a whole lot better (in say 3D MAX, Maya, etc) than GeForce.


I suppose I should have worded my title or question better. What I really want to know is how does Quadro 1000 compare to Quadro 2000. Is it worth the extra $250? The games I want to play suggest Geforce3 or better, and I don't know enough to figure out if a Quadro 1000 can handle that, or if upgrading to Quadro 2000 would mean it could handle that, or if a Quadro just won't cut it at all?


The Quadro 1000 and 2000 are both low end GPUs meant for workstations. BUT they can run some games. To be honest if you do not do find anything that needs a Quadro card then Geforce is ALWAYS a better option.


It sounds like Geforce is better. Could Quadro 1000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better? Could Quadro 2000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better?
m
0
l
May 4, 2013 10:39:31 PM

Alexandern said:
Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
ksham said:
For gaming: GeForce.
For a workstation: Quadro.

Quadro doesn't play games as well as GeForce, but it can do heavy graphics rendering a whole lot better (in say 3D MAX, Maya, etc) than GeForce.


I suppose I should have worded my title or question better. What I really want to know is how does Quadro 1000 compare to Quadro 2000. Is it worth the extra $250? The games I want to play suggest Geforce3 or better, and I don't know enough to figure out if a Quadro 1000 can handle that, or if upgrading to Quadro 2000 would mean it could handle that, or if a Quadro just won't cut it at all?


The Quadro 1000 and 2000 are both low end GPUs meant for workstations. BUT they can run some games. To be honest if you do not do find anything that needs a Quadro card then Geforce is ALWAYS a better option.


It sounds like Geforce is better. Could Quadro 1000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better? Could Quadro 2000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better?


Both could do it, yes.
m
0
l
May 4, 2013 10:40:33 PM

Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
ksham said:
For gaming: GeForce.
For a workstation: Quadro.

Quadro doesn't play games as well as GeForce, but it can do heavy graphics rendering a whole lot better (in say 3D MAX, Maya, etc) than GeForce.


I suppose I should have worded my title or question better. What I really want to know is how does Quadro 1000 compare to Quadro 2000. Is it worth the extra $250? The games I want to play suggest Geforce3 or better, and I don't know enough to figure out if a Quadro 1000 can handle that, or if upgrading to Quadro 2000 would mean it could handle that, or if a Quadro just won't cut it at all?


The Quadro 1000 and 2000 are both low end GPUs meant for workstations. BUT they can run some games. To be honest if you do not do find anything that needs a Quadro card then Geforce is ALWAYS a better option.


It sounds like Geforce is better. Could Quadro 1000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better? Could Quadro 2000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better?


Both could do it, yes.


Thanks. Any sense of how well they could do it? Will I be lagging a lot? Would upgrading to 2000 make much of a difference?
m
0
l
May 4, 2013 10:44:50 PM

Alexandern said:
Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
ksham said:
For gaming: GeForce.
For a workstation: Quadro.

Quadro doesn't play games as well as GeForce, but it can do heavy graphics rendering a whole lot better (in say 3D MAX, Maya, etc) than GeForce.


I suppose I should have worded my title or question better. What I really want to know is how does Quadro 1000 compare to Quadro 2000. Is it worth the extra $250? The games I want to play suggest Geforce3 or better, and I don't know enough to figure out if a Quadro 1000 can handle that, or if upgrading to Quadro 2000 would mean it could handle that, or if a Quadro just won't cut it at all?


The Quadro 1000 and 2000 are both low end GPUs meant for workstations. BUT they can run some games. To be honest if you do not do find anything that needs a Quadro card then Geforce is ALWAYS a better option.


It sounds like Geforce is better. Could Quadro 1000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better? Could Quadro 2000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better?


Both could do it, yes.


Thanks. Any sense of how well they could do it? Will I be lagging a lot? Would upgrading to 2000 make much of a difference?


Its never worth spending MORE on a Quadro for gaming. LOL... Save money and go for a Geforce and you will get BETTER gaming performance for CHEAPER.
m
0
l
May 4, 2013 10:49:08 PM

Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
ksham said:
For gaming: GeForce.
For a workstation: Quadro.

Quadro doesn't play games as well as GeForce, but it can do heavy graphics rendering a whole lot better (in say 3D MAX, Maya, etc) than GeForce.


I suppose I should have worded my title or question better. What I really want to know is how does Quadro 1000 compare to Quadro 2000. Is it worth the extra $250? The games I want to play suggest Geforce3 or better, and I don't know enough to figure out if a Quadro 1000 can handle that, or if upgrading to Quadro 2000 would mean it could handle that, or if a Quadro just won't cut it at all?


The Quadro 1000 and 2000 are both low end GPUs meant for workstations. BUT they can run some games. To be honest if you do not do find anything that needs a Quadro card then Geforce is ALWAYS a better option.


It sounds like Geforce is better. Could Quadro 1000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better? Could Quadro 2000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better?


Both could do it, yes.


Thanks. Any sense of how well they could do it? Will I be lagging a lot? Would upgrading to 2000 make much of a difference?


Its never worth spending MORE on a Quadro for gaming. LOL... Save money and go for a Geforce and you will get BETTER gaming performance for CHEAPER.


Unfortunately Geforce isn't an option. But from what you're saying, it sounds like there's no noticeable gaming difference between Quadro 1000 vs 2000 so I might as well stick with 1000 right?
m
0
l
May 4, 2013 10:50:29 PM

Correct.
m
0
l

Best solution

May 4, 2013 10:52:16 PM

Alexandern said:
Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
ksham said:
For gaming: GeForce.
For a workstation: Quadro.

Quadro doesn't play games as well as GeForce, but it can do heavy graphics rendering a whole lot better (in say 3D MAX, Maya, etc) than GeForce.


I suppose I should have worded my title or question better. What I really want to know is how does Quadro 1000 compare to Quadro 2000. Is it worth the extra $250? The games I want to play suggest Geforce3 or better, and I don't know enough to figure out if a Quadro 1000 can handle that, or if upgrading to Quadro 2000 would mean it could handle that, or if a Quadro just won't cut it at all?


The Quadro 1000 and 2000 are both low end GPUs meant for workstations. BUT they can run some games. To be honest if you do not do find anything that needs a Quadro card then Geforce is ALWAYS a better option.


It sounds like Geforce is better. Could Quadro 1000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better? Could Quadro 2000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better?


Both could do it, yes.


Thanks. Any sense of how well they could do it? Will I be lagging a lot? Would upgrading to 2000 make much of a difference?


Its never worth spending MORE on a Quadro for gaming. LOL... Save money and go for a Geforce and you will get BETTER gaming performance for CHEAPER.


Unfortunately Geforce isn't an option. But from what you're saying, it sounds like there's no noticeable gaming difference between Quadro 1000 vs 2000 so I might as well stick with 1000 right?


Its noticeable, just not worth 250$.
Share
May 4, 2013 10:59:52 PM

Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
Novuake said:
Alexandern said:
ksham said:
For gaming: GeForce.
For a workstation: Quadro.

Quadro doesn't play games as well as GeForce, but it can do heavy graphics rendering a whole lot better (in say 3D MAX, Maya, etc) than GeForce.


I suppose I should have worded my title or question better. What I really want to know is how does Quadro 1000 compare to Quadro 2000. Is it worth the extra $250? The games I want to play suggest Geforce3 or better, and I don't know enough to figure out if a Quadro 1000 can handle that, or if upgrading to Quadro 2000 would mean it could handle that, or if a Quadro just won't cut it at all?


The Quadro 1000 and 2000 are both low end GPUs meant for workstations. BUT they can run some games. To be honest if you do not do find anything that needs a Quadro card then Geforce is ALWAYS a better option.


It sounds like Geforce is better. Could Quadro 1000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better? Could Quadro 2000 play a game that suggests Geforce 3xx or better?


Both could do it, yes.


Thanks. Any sense of how well they could do it? Will I be lagging a lot? Would upgrading to 2000 make much of a difference?


Its never worth spending MORE on a Quadro for gaming. LOL... Save money and go for a Geforce and you will get BETTER gaming performance for CHEAPER.


Unfortunately Geforce isn't an option. But from what you're saying, it sounds like there's no noticeable gaming difference between Quadro 1000 vs 2000 so I might as well stick with 1000 right?


Its noticeable, just not worth 250$.


I guess my last follow up, is thinking more long term. In 3 or 4 years, am I going to regret not upgrading to 2000? Will it be much more outdated as compared to the 1000?
m
0
l
May 4, 2013 11:05:39 PM

More like: you'll regret not getting a GeForce card. Getting a Quadro 2000 will be just as useless as a Quadro 1000 in a few years let along 3-4 years.

Also, if we can just stop quoting massive posts, that'll be great. :) 
m
0
l
!