AMD Radeon R7 430 OEM vs NVIDIA Quadro K620
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R7 430 OEM and NVIDIA Quadro K620 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 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), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 430 OEM
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- Around 4% higher texture fill rate: 18.72 GTexel / s vs 17.98 GTexel / s
- Around 34% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3341 vs 2490
- Around 34% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3341 vs 2490
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 vs 3329
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 vs 3329
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 30 June 2016 vs 22 July 2014 |
| Texture fill rate | 18.72 GTexel / s vs 17.98 GTexel / s |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3341 vs 2490 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3341 vs 2490 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 vs 3329 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 vs 3329 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K620
- Around 45% higher core clock speed: 1058 MHz vs 730 MHz
- Around 44% higher boost clock speed: 1124 MHz vs 780 MHz
- Around 44% better floating-point performance: 863.2 gflops vs 599.0 gflops
- Around 22% lower typical power consumption: 41 Watt vs 50 Watt
- Around 30% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 480 vs 370
- 2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2220 vs 1090
- Around 16% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 6869 vs 5924
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1058 MHz vs 730 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1124 MHz vs 780 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 863.2 gflops vs 599.0 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 41 Watt vs 50 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 480 vs 370 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2220 vs 1090 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6869 vs 5924 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 430 OEM
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K620
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 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 R7 430 OEM | NVIDIA Quadro K620 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 370 | 480 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1090 | 2220 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5924 | 6869 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3341 | 2490 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3341 | 2490 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3329 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3329 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 22.112 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 297.631 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.427 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.363 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 99.125 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2970 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2970 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 702 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R7 430 OEM | NVIDIA Quadro K620 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Maxwell |
| Code name | Oland | GM107 |
| Launch date | 30 June 2016 | 22 July 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 699 | 953 |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $189.89 | |
| Price now | $189.93 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 15.23 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 780 MHz | 1124 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 730 MHz | 1058 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 599.0 gflops | 863.2 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 384 |
| Texture fill rate | 18.72 GTexel / s | 17.98 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 41 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,040 million | 1,870 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort, DVI-I DP |
| Number of simultaneous displays | 4 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
| Length | 160 mm | |
| Width | 1" (2.5 cm) | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.8 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Memory type | DDR3 | 128 Bit |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Desktop Management | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon R7 430 OEM with others
AMDRadeon R7 430 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce PCX 5900
AMDRadeon R7 430 OEM vs
NVIDIAQuadro NVS 280 PCI
AMDRadeon R7 430 OEM vs
ATIRadeon X600 XT
AMDRadeon R7 430 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 415 OEM
AMDRadeon R7 430 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 660 Ti
AMDRadeon R7 430 OEM vs
NVIDIAQuadro M2000M
