OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£750VRAM:16 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):70 W

NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 1 expert reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell
6.8/10

Overall score

Score
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
Score components

40%

6.3

Technical score

25%

6.3

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.8, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–¼Worse than 74% of graphics cards
6.7

Value for money

Value for money
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

70%

6.8

Overall score

30%

6.6

Price

â–¼Worse than 83%
6.3

Technical score

Technical score
6.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
Score components

44%

4.8

Performance

24%

5.7

Memory

12%

7.3

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

9.6

Design

4%

9.9

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 65%
6.3

Reviews score

Reviews score
6.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 79% of models

6.3

Mark 7.5 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

8.1

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 79%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • nvidia-rtx-pro-2000-blackwell
nvidia-rtx-pro-2000-blackwell
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell

Technical score
Technical score
6.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
Score components:

44%

4.8

Performance

24%

5.7

Memory

12%

7.3

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

9.6

Design

4%

9.9

Connectivity

6.3
Reviews score
6.3
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components:

70%

6.8

Overall score

30%

6.6

Price

6.7
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
20,000 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 20,000 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 64.9% of graphics cards and equal to 1.5% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
?
PassMark (G3D) result
17,607 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 17,607 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 66.6% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
6,280 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 6,280 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 78% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
17 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 17 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 60.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
16 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 16 GB of VRAM, which is more than 62% of graphics cards and equal to 28.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR7
This graphics card uses GDDR7 memory, which is newer than on 79.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.4% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 68.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
288 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 288 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 69.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.5% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
18,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 18,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 51.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.9% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
5
This graphics card supports PCIe 5, which is newer than on 73% of graphics cards and equal to 27% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x8
This graphics card uses x8 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 75.9% of graphics cards and equal to 22.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.8% of graphics cards and equal to 77.2% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
4
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 4 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 97.8% of graphics cards and equal to 2.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
2.1b
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 2.1b, which is more advanced than on 77.8% of graphics cards and equal to 22.2% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
20 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 20 Gbps, which is slower than on 50.4% of graphics cards and equal to 7.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
70 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 70 W, which is lower than that of 93.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.5% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
70 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 70 W under peak load, which is lower than 94.2% of graphics cards and equal to 1.3% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
250 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 250 W PSU, which is lower than that of 99.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.5% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
70 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 70 W, which is lower than that of 94.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.4% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
70 W
Show more
Size
167x 69x 20 mm
Length
167.6 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 167.6 mm long, which is shorter than 96.3% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Height
69 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 69 mm tall, which is shorter than 92.5% of graphics cards and equal in height to 1.6% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
299 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 299 g, which is lighter than 97.3% of Graphics cards.
Show more

NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • 67.4% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (70 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    70 W vs 215 W
  • 61.5% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (250 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    250 W vs 650 W
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 114.6 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (167.6 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    167.6 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • Newer PCIe version
    This graphics card supports a newer PCIe version than the average graphics card (5 vs 4).
    5 vs 4
  • 56 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (69 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    69 mm vs 125 mm
  • 1 more DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has more DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (4 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    4 vs 3
  • 2 years newer
    This graphics card was released more recently than the average graphics card (2025 vs 2023).
    August 2025
    2025 vs 2023
  • 3.3x higher INT8 performance
    This graphics card has a higher INT8 performance than the average graphics card (798 TOPS vs 242 TOPS). The average graphics card has INT8 performance of 242 TOPS.
    798 TOPS vs 242 TOPS
  • 35.3% higher gaming score
    This graphics card has a higher gaming score than the average graphics card (20,000 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    20,000 points vs 14,779 points
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • Newer GDDR version
    This graphics card uses a newer GDDR version than the average graphics card (GDDR7 vs GDDR6).
    GDDR7 vs GDDR6
  • 8x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (32 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    32 MB vs 4 MB
  • Newer PCIe version
    This graphics card supports a newer PCIe version than the average graphics card (5 vs 4).
    5 vs 4
  • Supports virtual GPU
    This graphics card supports virtual GPU features, the average graphics card does not.
  • 1 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    1 vs 0
  • 1 more DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has more DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (4 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    4 vs 3
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2.1b vs 1.4a).
    2.1b vs 1.4a
  • Newer HDMI version
    This graphics card supports a newer HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.1b vs 2.1a).
    2.1b vs 2.1a
  • More NVENC sessions
    This graphics card has more concurrent NVENC sessions than the average graphics card (Unlimited vs 8). The average graphics card has 8 concurrent NVENC sessions.
    Unlimited vs 8
  • 67.4% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (70 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    70 W vs 215 W
  • 61.5% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (250 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    250 W vs 650 W
  • 68.2% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (70 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    70 W vs 220 W
  • 68.2% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (70 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    70 W vs 220 W
  • 8 °C lower load temperature
    This graphics card has a lower load temperature than the average graphics card (59 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    59 °C vs 67 °C
  • 114.6 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (167.6 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    167.6 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 56 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (69 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    69 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 70.5% lighter
    This graphics card is lighter than the average graphics card (299 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    299 g vs 1,014 g
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • 48.9% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (982 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    982 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 21.9% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1957 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,957 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • No overclocking support
    This graphics card does not support overclocking, the average graphics card does.
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • 35.7% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 12.5% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.3/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models

    6.3

    Mark 7.5 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    8.1

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    6.3 vs 7.2
  • 10.6% worse value for money
    NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.7 vs 7.4).
    6.7 vs 7.41
  • 44.2% more expensive
    NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell is more expensive than the average graphics card (£750 vs £520).
    £750 vs £520
  • 48.9% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (982 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    982 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 21.9% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1957 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,957 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 48 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (136 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    136 vs 184
  • 29.8% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (265.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    265.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 6 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (34 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    34 vs 40
  • 6 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (34 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    34 vs 40
  • 22.6% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (124.8 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    124.8 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 24.8% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (17 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    17 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 22.2% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (17,607 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    17,607 points vs 22,638 points
  • 48% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (6,280 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    6,280 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • 35.7% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 35.7% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,125 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,125 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 5.3% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (18,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    18,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.7 vs 6.8).
    6.7 vs 6.8
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • No HDMI output
    This graphics card does not include HDMI output, the average graphics card does.
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No overclocking support
    This graphics card does not support overclocking, the average graphics card does.
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 30 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (30 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    30 dB vs 0 dB
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
ct.nl
≈ estimated
17/03/2026
Lab test · Workstation card
Verdict
The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell is a compact workstation card that clearly outpaces its predecessor for AI and rendering work, but its fan never stops spinning.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell

  • Compact dual-slot design (2.7-inch height) fits easily into small-form-factor (SFF) cases and mini PCs.
  • Highly power-efficient with a max 70W TDP, requiring no additional external power connectors.
  • Equipped with 16GB of ultra-fast GDDR7 ECC memory, providing a significant boost over previous generations for large datasets.
  • Excellent for AI and ray tracing workloads, featuring 5th-gen Tensor cores and 4th-gen RT cores.
  • Supports next-gen connectivity like DisplayPort 2.1b and PCIe Gen 5.
  • Maintains cool operating temperatures even under heavy load, frequently staying under control for professionals.

What customers don't like about NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell

  • Small cooling fan can be loud, spinning at high RPMs (up to 3000) even when the card is idling.
  • Minimum fan speed is often locked at 30%, which some users find frustrating for silent builds.
  • Commands a high price premium for its workstation-class certifications compared to equivalent consumer cards.
  • Slower inference performance in some specific tasks compared to older but higher-tier cards like the RTX A4000.
  • Limited memory bandwidth (128-bit interface) compared to higher-end workstation GPUs.

Verdict

The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell is a compact, low-profile professional workstation GPU built on the 5nm Blackwell architecture, featuring 4,352 CUDA cores, 136 5th Gen Tensor cores, and 34 4th Gen RT cores. It is equipped with 16GB of GDDR7 ECC memory on a 128-bit interface, delivering 288 GB/s bandwidth and 545 AI TOPS for accelerated generative AI and CAD workflows. Its main pros include an exceptionally efficient 70W maximum power draw that requires no external power connectors, PCIe 5.0 x8 support, and four Mini DisplayPort 2.1b outputs for high-resolution 8K displays. However, its primary cons are the limited 128-bit memory bus which restricts bandwidth compared to higher-tier models and the performance trade-off inherent in its small form factor, which may lag behind older full-sized cards like the RTX A4000 in heavy inference tasks.

Compare NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found