NVIDIA Quadro FX 1600M vs NVIDIA GRID K2
We compared two Professional market GPUs: 512MB VRAM Quadro FX 1600M and 4GB VRAM GRID K2 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 K2 's Advantages
Released 5 years and 11 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 K2
+2761%
2.289 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Jun 2007
Release Date
May 2013
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
-
Power Connectors
1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
Graphics Processor
G84
GPU Name
GK104
NB8P-GLM
GPU Variant
GK104-895-A2
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
1.2.175
1.1
CUDA
3.0
4.0
Shader Model
6.5 (5.1)
