AMD Radeon R5 340X OEM vs NVIDIA Quadro K600
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R5 340X OEM and NVIDIA Quadro K600 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R5 340X OEM
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- Around 3% higher core clock speed: 900 MHz vs 876 MHz
- Around 80% higher texture fill rate: 25.2 GTexel / s vs 14.02 GTexel / s
- 2x more pipelines: 384 vs 192
- 2.4x better floating-point performance: 806.4 gflops vs 336.4 gflops
- 2.2x more memory clock speed: 4000 MHz vs 1782 MHz
- 2.8x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5150 vs 1830
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1841 vs 1745
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1841 vs 1745
- Around 44% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3260 vs 2261
- Around 44% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3260 vs 2261
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 5 May 2015 vs 1 March 2013 |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz vs 876 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel / s vs 14.02 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 384 vs 192 |
| Floating-point performance | 806.4 gflops vs 336.4 gflops |
| Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz vs 1782 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5150 vs 1830 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1841 vs 1745 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1841 vs 1745 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3260 vs 2261 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3260 vs 2261 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K600
- Around 59% lower typical power consumption: 41 Watt vs 65 Watt
- Around 11% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1227 vs 1106
- Around 11% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1227 vs 1106
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 41 Watt vs 65 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1227 vs 1106 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1227 vs 1106 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R5 340X OEM
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K600
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R5 340X OEM | NVIDIA Quadro K600 |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5150 | 1830 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1106 | 1227 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1106 | 1227 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1841 | 1745 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1841 | 1745 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3260 | 2261 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3260 | 2261 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 728 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 278 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 6.367 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 118.389 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.396 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 7.921 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 9.393 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R5 340X OEM | NVIDIA Quadro K600 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
| Code name | Oland | GK107 |
| Launch date | 5 May 2015 | 1 March 2013 |
| Place in performance rating | 1281 | 1367 |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | |
| Price now | $78.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 11.66 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 876 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 806.4 gflops | 336.4 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 192 |
| Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel / s | 14.02 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 41 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,040 million | 1,270 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
| Length | 160 mm | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 72 GB / s | 28.51 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz | 1782 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon R5 340X OEM with others
AMDRadeon R5 340X OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce FX 5700 Ultra
AMDRadeon R5 340X OEM vs
ATIRadeon 9250
AMDRadeon R5 340X OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce 6800 XT
AMDRadeon R5 340X OEM vs
AMDRadeon HD 8510G
AMDRadeon R5 340X OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 630 Rev. 2
AMDRadeon R5 340X OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce 820A
