NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 vs NVIDIA GRID K280Q
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 and NVIDIA GRID K280Q 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, 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- Around 37% higher core clock speed: 1024 MHz vs 745 MHz
- 2.5x lower typical power consumption: 90 Watt vs 225 Watt
- Around 88% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5335 vs 2840
- Around 73% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 643 vs 371
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6803 vs 6555
- 2.8x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3697 vs 1312
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6803 vs 6555
- 2.8x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3697 vs 1312
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 20 August 2015 vs 28 June 2013 |
Core clock speed | 1024 MHz vs 745 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 90 Watt vs 225 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5335 vs 2840 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 643 vs 371 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6803 vs 6555 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3697 vs 1312 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6803 vs 6555 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3697 vs 1312 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GRID K280Q
- Around 94% higher texture fill rate: 95.36 GTexel / s vs 49.2 billion / sec
- 2x more pipelines: 1536 vs 768
- Around 25% better floating-point performance: 2,289 gflops vs 1,825 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- 833.3x more memory clock speed: 5000 MHz vs 6.6 GB/s
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3562 vs 3356
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3562 vs 3356
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 95.36 GTexel / s vs 49.2 billion / sec |
Pipelines | 1536 vs 768 |
Floating-point performance | 2,289 gflops vs 1,825 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz vs 6.6 GB/s |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3562 vs 3356 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3562 vs 3356 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950
GPU 2: NVIDIA GRID K280Q
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
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) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 | NVIDIA GRID K280Q |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5335 | 2840 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 643 | 371 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 16715 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 60.473 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 758.865 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.279 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 29.738 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 231.508 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6803 | 6555 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3697 | 1312 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 3562 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6803 | 6555 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3697 | 1312 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 3562 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1862 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 | NVIDIA GRID K280Q | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Kepler |
Code name | GM206 | GK104 |
Launch date | 20 August 2015 | 28 June 2013 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $159 | $1,875 |
Place in performance rating | 540 | 542 |
Price now | $194.44 | |
Type | Desktop | Workstation |
Value for money (0-100) | 30.06 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1188 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 1024 MHz | 745 MHz |
CUDA cores | 768 | |
Floating-point performance | 1,825 gflops | 2,289 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 768 | 1536 |
Texture fill rate | 49.2 billion / sec | 95.36 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 90 Watt | 225 Watt |
Transistor count | 2,940 million | 3,540 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 | No outputs |
G-SYNC support | ||
HDCP | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 7.938" (20.2 cm) | |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
SLI options | 2x | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pins | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 105.6 GB / s | 160.0 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 6.6 GB/s | 5000 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
Adaptive Vertical Sync | ||
CUDA | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
SLI | ||
Surround |