NVIDIA GRID K220Q vs NVIDIA Quadro K5100M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GRID K220Q and NVIDIA Quadro K5100M 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), 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GRID K220Q
- Videocard is newer: launch date 11 month(s) later
- Around 39% higher memory clock speed: 5000 MHz vs 3600 MHz
- Around 55% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 539 vs 347
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 2 July 2014 vs 23 July 2013 |
| Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz vs 3600 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 539 vs 347 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M
- Around 3% higher core clock speed: 771 MHz vs 745 MHz
- Around 3% higher texture fill rate: 98.69 GTexel / s vs 95.36 GTexel / s
- Around 3% better floating-point performance: 2,369 gflops vs 2,289 gflops
- 2.3x lower typical power consumption: 100 Watt vs 225 Watt
- 16x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 512 MB
- 3.5x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3217 vs 912
- 8.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6747 vs 833
- 8.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6747 vs 833
- Around 75% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 2128
- Around 75% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 2128
- Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3362 vs 2660
- Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3362 vs 2660
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 771 MHz vs 745 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 98.69 GTexel / s vs 95.36 GTexel / s |
| Floating-point performance | 2,369 gflops vs 2,289 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt vs 225 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 512 MB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3217 vs 912 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6747 vs 833 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6747 vs 833 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 vs 2128 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 vs 2128 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3362 vs 2660 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3362 vs 2660 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GRID K220Q
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K5100M
| 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 K220Q | NVIDIA Quadro K5100M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 912 | 3217 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 539 | 347 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 833 | 6747 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 833 | 6747 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2128 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2128 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2660 | 3362 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2660 | 3362 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11613 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 5.972 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 355.305 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.022 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.706 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 34.772 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GRID K220Q | NVIDIA Quadro K5100M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | Kepler |
| Code name | GK104 | GK104 |
| Launch date | 2 July 2014 | 23 July 2013 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $469 | |
| Place in performance rating | 760 | 761 |
| Type | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Price now | $309.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 13.80 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 745 MHz | 771 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 2,289 gflops | 2,369 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1536 | 1536 |
| Texture fill rate | 95.36 GTexel / s | 98.69 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 225 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Transistor count | 3,540 million | 3,540 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 8 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 160.0 GB / s | 115.2 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz | 3600 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GRID K220Q with others
NVIDIAGRID K220Q vs
ATIMobility FireGL V3200
NVIDIAGRID K220Q vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 3450
NVIDIAGRID K220Q vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5100M
NVIDIAGRID K220Q vs
NVIDIAQuadro M1200 Mobile
NVIDIAGRID K220Q vs
NVIDIAQuadro P520
NVIDIAGRID K220Q vs
NVIDIAGeForce MX330
