NVIDIA Quadro 410 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro 410 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M 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 - 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), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 410

• Videocard is newer: launch date 4 month(s) later
• Around 33% higher pipelines: 192 vs 144
• Around 7% better floating-point performance: 271.1 gflops vs 253.4 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• Around 28% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 219 vs 171
• Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 5.393 vs 5.332
• Around 15% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 919 vs 800
• Around 15% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 919 vs 800

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M

• Around 9% lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 38 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 1 GB vs 512 MB
• Around 1% higher memory clock speed: 1800 MHz vs 1782 MHz
• Around 28% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 559 vs 438
• Around 75% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 2535 vs 1446
• Around 63% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 205.545 vs 126.006
• Around 92% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 10.932 vs 5.685
• 2.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 22.728 vs 8.847
• Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1833 vs 1311
• Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2418 vs 1794
• Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1833 vs 1311
• Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2418 vs 1794

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro 410
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	438 559
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	219 171
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	1446 2535
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5.393 5.332
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	126.006 205.545
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5.685 10.932
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8.847 22.728
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	919 800
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1311 1833
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1794 2418
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	919 800
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1311 1833
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1794 2418

Compare specifications (specs)