Home GPU Comparison NVIDIA Quadro FX 1600M vs NVIDIA GRID K520Q

NVIDIA Quadro FX 1600M vs NVIDIA GRID K520Q

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 512MB VRAM Quadro FX 1600M and 4GB VRAM GRID K520Q to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.

Main Differences

NVIDIA Quadro FX 1600M 's Advantages
Lower TDP (50W vs 225W)
NVIDIA GRID K520Q 's Advantages
Released 7 years and 1 months late
More VRAM (4GB vs 512GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (160.0GB/s vs 25.60GB/s)
1504 additional rendering cores

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Quadro FX 1600M
0.08 TFLOPS
GRID K520Q +2761%
2.289 TFLOPS
VS

Graphics Card

Jun 2007
Release Date
Jul 2014
Quadro FX Mobile
Generation
GRID
Professional
Type
Professional
MXM-HE
Bus Interface
PCIe 3.0 x16

Clock Speeds

-
-
-
-
-
-
800 MHz
Memory Clock
1250 MHz

Memory

512MB
Memory Size
4GB
GDDR3
Memory Type
GDDR5
128bit
Memory Bus
256bit
25.60GB/s
Bandwidth
160.0GB/s

Render Config

-
-
-
4
SM Count
-
32
Shading Units
1536
16
TMUs
128
8
ROPs
32
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
L1 Cache
16 KB (per SMX)
32 KB
L2 Cache
512 KB
-
-
-

Theoretical Performance

5.000 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
23.84 GPixel/s
10.00 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
95.36 GTexel/s
-
-
-
80.00 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
2.289 TFLOPS
-
FP64 (double)
95.36 GFLOPS

Board Design

50W
TDP
225W
-
Suggested PSU
550 W
No outputs
Outputs
No outputs
-
-
-

Graphics Processor

G84
GPU Name
GK104
NB8P-GLM
GPU Variant
-
Tesla
Architecture
Kepler
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
80 nm
Process Size
28 nm
0.289 billion
Transistors
3.54 billion
169 mm²
Die Size
294 mm²

Graphics Features

11.1 (10_0)
DirectX
12 (11_0)
3.3
OpenGL
4.6
1.1
OpenCL
3.0
N/A
Vulkan
1.1
1.1
CUDA
3.0
4.0
Shader Model
5.1

Related GPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy