Home GPU Comparison NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive vs NVIDIA GRID K260Q

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive vs NVIDIA GRID K260Q

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 48GB VRAM Quadro RTX 8000 Passive and 2GB VRAM GRID K260Q to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.

Main Differences

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive 's Advantages
Released 5 years and 2 months late
Boost Clock1620MHz
More VRAM (48GB vs 2GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (672.0GB/s vs 160.0GB/s)
3072 additional rendering cores
NVIDIA GRID K260Q 's Advantages
Lower TDP (225W vs 260W)

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Quadro RTX 8000 Passive +552%
14.93 TFLOPS
GRID K260Q
2.289 TFLOPS
VS

Graphics Card

Aug 2018
Release Date
Jun 2013
Quadro
Generation
GRID
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 3.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 3.0 x16

Clock Speeds

1230 MHz
Base Clock
-
1620 MHz
Boost Clock
-
1750 MHz
Memory Clock
1250 MHz

Memory

48GB
Memory Size
2GB
GDDR6
Memory Type
GDDR5
384bit
Memory Bus
256bit
672.0GB/s
Bandwidth
160.0GB/s

Render Config

-
-
-
72
SM Count
-
4608
Shading Units
1536
288
TMUs
128
96
ROPs
32
576
Tensor Cores
-
72
RT Cores
-
64 KB (per SM)
L1 Cache
16 KB (per SMX)
6 MB
L2 Cache
512 KB
-
-
-

Theoretical Performance

155.5 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
23.84 GPixel/s
466.6 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
95.36 GTexel/s
29.86 TFLOPS
FP16 (half)
-
14.93 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
2.289 TFLOPS
466.6 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
95.36 GFLOPS

Board Design

260W
TDP
225W
600 W
Suggested PSU
550 W
No outputs
Outputs
No outputs
1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
Power Connectors
-

Graphics Processor

TU102
GPU Name
GK104
TU102-875-A1
GPU Variant
-
Turing
Architecture
Kepler
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
12 nm
Process Size
28 nm
18.6 billion
Transistors
3.54 billion
754 mm²
Die Size
294 mm²

Graphics Features

12 Ultimate (12_2)
DirectX
12 (11_0)
4.6
OpenGL
4.6
3.0
OpenCL
3.0
1.3
Vulkan
1.1
7.5
CUDA
3.0
6.6
Shader Model
5.1

Related GPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy