NVIDIA GRID K160Q vs AMD Radeon HD 6750
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GRID K160Q and AMD Radeon HD 6750 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 - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, 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), 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 NVIDIA GRID K160Q
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- Around 70% higher memory clock speed: 1782 MHz vs 1050 MHz
| Launch date | 28 June 2013 vs 21 January 2011 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
| Memory clock speed | 1782 MHz vs 1050 MHz |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 6750
- Around 85% higher texture fill rate: 25.2 GTexel / s vs 13.6 GTexel / s
- 3.8x more pipelines: 720 vs 192
- 3.1x better floating-point performance: 1,008.0 gflops vs 326.4 gflops
- Around 51% lower typical power consumption: 86 Watt vs 130 Watt
- Around 66% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1043 vs 628
- Around 4% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 273 vs 262
- Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2100 vs 1237
- Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2100 vs 1237
- Around 81% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3378 vs 1871
- Around 81% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3378 vs 1871
- Around 27% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 2654
- Around 27% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 2654
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel / s vs 13.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 720 vs 192 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,008.0 gflops vs 326.4 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 86 Watt vs 130 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1043 vs 628 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 273 vs 262 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2100 vs 1237 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2100 vs 1237 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3378 vs 1871 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3378 vs 1871 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 2654 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 2654 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GRID K160Q
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6750
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| 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 | NVIDIA GRID K160Q | AMD Radeon HD 6750 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 628 | 1043 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 262 | 273 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1237 | 2100 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1237 | 2100 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1871 | 3378 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1871 | 3378 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2654 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2654 | 3358 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.039 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 544.041 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.867 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 20.664 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 91.074 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GRID K160Q | AMD Radeon HD 6750 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | TeraScale 2 |
| Code name | GK107 | Juniper |
| Launch date | 28 June 2013 | 21 January 2011 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $125 | $49.99 |
| Place in performance rating | 1044 | 1045 |
| Type | Workstation | Desktop |
| Design | AMD Radeon HD 6000 Series | |
| Price now | $49.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 33.46 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz | |
| Floating-point performance | 326.4 gflops | 1,008.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 192 | 720 |
| Texture fill rate | 13.6 GTexel / s | 25.2 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 130 Watt | 86 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,270 million | 1,040 million |
| Boost clock speed | 900 MHz | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| Dual-link DVI support | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Bus support | PCIe 2.0 x16 | |
| Length | 170 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.51 GB / s | 73.6 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1782 MHz | 1050 MHz |
| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GRID K160Q with others
NVIDIAGRID K160Q vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 4550
NVIDIAGRID K160Q vs
AMDRadeon HD 6650M
NVIDIAGRID K160Q vs
AMDRadeon HD 6750
NVIDIAGRID K160Q vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 650
NVIDIAGRID K160Q vs
AMDFirePro W4170M
NVIDIAGRID K160Q vs
NVIDIAGeForce 845M
