NVIDIA GRID K2 vs NVIDIA Quadro 5000

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GRID K2 and NVIDIA Quadro 5000 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: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 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 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GRID K2

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 2 month(s) later
• Around 45% higher core clock speed: 745 MHz vs 513 MHz
• 13.1x more texture fill rate: 2x 95.36 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 22.57 GTexel / s
• 8.7x more pipelines: 2x 1536 vs 352
• 6.3x better floating-point performance: 2x 2,289 gflops vs 722.3 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 3.2x more maximum memory size: 2x 4 GB vs 2560 MB
• Around 67% higher memory clock speed: 5000 MHz vs 3000 MHz
• Around 42% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2737 vs 1932
• Around 41% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 10471 vs 7451
• Around 15% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 18.943 vs 16.451
• Around 89% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 968.568 vs 511.131
• Around 30% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.51 vs 1.925
• Around 93% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 32.988 vs 17.065
• 2.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 114.144 vs 46.591
• 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6371 vs 2602
• 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6371 vs 2602

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 5000

• Around 48% lower typical power consumption: 152 Watt vs 225 Watt
• Around 21% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 387 vs 319
• 9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3104 vs 344
• 10.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3316 vs 312
• 9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3104 vs 344
• 10.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3316 vs 312

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GRID K2
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 5000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2737 1932
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	319 387
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	10471 7451
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	18.943 16.451
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	968.568 511.131
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.51 1.925
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	32.988 17.065
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	114.144 46.591
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6371 2602
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	344 3104
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	312 3316
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6371 2602
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	344 3104
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	312 3316

Compare specifications (specs)