NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 vs NVIDIA Quadro K620
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 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 - 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 960
- Videocard is newer: launch date 6 month(s) later
- Around 7% higher core clock speed: 1127 MHz vs 1058 MHz
- Around 5% higher boost clock speed: 1178 MHz vs 1124 MHz
- 4x more texture fill rate: 72 billion / sec vs 17.98 GTexel / s
- 2.7x more pipelines: 1024 vs 384
- 2.8x better floating-point performance: 2,413 gflops vs 863.2 gflops
- 2.8x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6111 vs 2220
- Around 40% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 673 vs 480
- 2.7x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 18734 vs 6869
- 3.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 73.733 vs 22.112
- 2.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 792.44 vs 297.631
- 3.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.888 vs 1.427
- 2.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 35.338 vs 15.363
- 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 200.825 vs 99.125
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7218 vs 2970
- Around 48% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3691 vs 2490
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7218 vs 2970
- Around 48% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3691 vs 2490
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 22 January 2015 vs 22 July 2014 |
| Core clock speed | 1127 MHz vs 1058 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1178 MHz vs 1124 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 72 billion / sec vs 17.98 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1024 vs 384 |
| Floating-point performance | 2,413 gflops vs 863.2 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6111 vs 2220 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 673 vs 480 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 18734 vs 6869 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 73.733 vs 22.112 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 792.44 vs 297.631 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.888 vs 1.427 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 35.338 vs 15.363 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 200.825 vs 99.125 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7218 vs 2970 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3691 vs 2490 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3335 vs 3329 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7218 vs 2970 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3691 vs 2490 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3335 vs 3329 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K620
- 2.9x lower typical power consumption: 41 Watt vs 120 Watt
- 257.1x more memory clock speed: 1800 MHz vs 7.0 GB/s
- 4.3x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 702 vs 162
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 41 Watt vs 120 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz vs 7.0 GB/s |
| Benchmarks | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 702 vs 162 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K620
| 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 |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 | NVIDIA Quadro K620 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6111 | 2220 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 673 | 480 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 18734 | 6869 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 73.733 | 22.112 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 792.44 | 297.631 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.888 | 1.427 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 35.338 | 15.363 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 200.825 | 99.125 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7218 | 2970 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3691 | 2490 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3335 | 3329 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7218 | 2970 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3691 | 2490 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3335 | 3329 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 162 | 702 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 | NVIDIA Quadro K620 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Maxwell |
| Code name | GM206 | GM107 |
| Launch date | 22 January 2015 | 22 July 2014 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | $189.89 |
| Place in performance rating | 514 | 953 |
| Price now | $229.99 | $189.93 |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
| Value for money (0-100) | 34.63 | 15.23 |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1178 MHz | 1124 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1127 MHz | 1058 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 1024 | |
| Floating-point performance | 2,413 gflops | 863.2 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 384 |
| Texture fill rate | 72 billion / sec | 17.98 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt | 41 Watt |
| Transistor count | 2,940 million | 1,870 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
| Display Connectors | Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2, 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort, DVI-I DP |
| HDCP | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
| Number of simultaneous displays | 4 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 9.5" (24.1 cm) | 160 mm |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 400 Watt | |
| SLI options | 2x | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pins | None |
| Width | 1" (2.5 cm) | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
| Shader Model | 5 | |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 112 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 7.0 GB/s | 1800 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | 128 Bit |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| GameStream | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Desktop Management | ||
