NVIDIA Quadro K1100M vs NVIDIA NVS 5400M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K1100M and NVIDIA NVS 5400M 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 Quadro K1100M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 1 month(s) later
• Around 7% higher core clock speed: 706 MHz vs 660 MHz
• 2.1x more texture fill rate: 22.59 GTexel / s vs 10.56 GTexel / s
• 4x more pipelines: 384 vs 96
• 2.1x better floating-point performance: 542.2 gflops vs 253.4 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• Around 56% higher memory clock speed: 2800 MHz vs 1800 MHz
• Around 74% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1090 vs 625
• Around 35% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 254 vs 188
• Around 50% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3067 vs 2045
• Around 71% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.649 vs 5.068
• Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.642 vs 0.635
• Around 3% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 11.732 vs 11.384
• Around 77% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1892 vs 1069
• Around 47% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 vs 2282
• Around 77% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1892 vs 1069
• Around 47% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 vs 2282

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA NVS 5400M

• Around 29% lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 45 Watt
• Around 32% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 229.562 vs 174.555
• Around 21% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 19.696 vs 16.3
• Around 92% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1652 vs 861
• Around 92% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1652 vs 861

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K1100M
GPU 2: NVIDIA NVS 5400M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1090 625
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	254 188
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	3067 2045
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8.649 5.068
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	174.555 229.562
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.642 0.635
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	11.732 11.384
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	16.3 19.696
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1892 1069
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	861 1652
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3356 2282
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1892 1069
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	861 1652
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3356 2282

Compare specifications (specs)