NVIDIA Quadro 410 vs NVIDIA Quadro 600

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro 410 and NVIDIA Quadro 600 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 - 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 1 year(s) 7 month(s) later
• Around 10% higher core clock speed: 706 MHz vs 640 MHz
• Around 10% higher texture fill rate: 11.3 GTexel / s vs 10.24 GTexel / s
• 2x more pipelines: 192 vs 96
• Around 10% better floating-point performance: 271.1 gflops vs 245.76 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• Around 5% lower typical power consumption: 38 Watt vs 40 Watt
• Around 11% higher memory clock speed: 1782 MHz vs 1600 MHz
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 919 vs 899
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1311 vs 1255
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 919 vs 899
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1311 vs 1255

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 600

• 2x more maximum memory size: 1 GB vs 512 MB
• Around 22% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 535 vs 438
• Around 5% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 230 vs 220
• Around 42% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 2056 vs 1446
• Around 4% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 5.617 vs 5.393
• Around 47% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 185.752 vs 126.006
• Around 56% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 8.848 vs 5.685
• Around 82% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 16.137 vs 8.847
• Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2037 vs 1794
• Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2037 vs 1794

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro 410
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 600

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	438 535
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	220 230
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	1446 2056
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5.393 5.617
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	126.006 185.752
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5.685 8.848
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8.847 16.137
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	919 899
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1311 1255
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1794 2037
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	919 899
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1311 1255
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1794 2037

Compare specifications (specs)