NVIDIA Quadro K620 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K620 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M 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 K620
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 0 month(s) later
- Around 8% higher core clock speed: 1058 MHz vs 980 MHz
- Around 15% better floating-point performance: 863.2 gflops vs 752.6 gflops
- Around 22% lower typical power consumption: 41 Watt vs 50 Watt
- Around 30% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2225 vs 1706
- Around 47% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 478 vs 326
- Around 39% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 6869 vs 4935
- Around 78% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 22.112 vs 12.449
- Around 10% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.427 vs 1.295
- 3.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 99.125 vs 28.025
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 22 July 2014 vs 25 June 2013 |
| Core clock speed | 1058 MHz vs 980 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 863.2 gflops vs 752.6 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 41 Watt vs 50 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2225 vs 1706 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 478 vs 326 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6869 vs 4935 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 22.112 vs 12.449 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.427 vs 1.295 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 99.125 vs 28.025 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M
- Around 74% higher texture fill rate: 31.36 GTexel / s vs 17.98 GTexel / s
- 3x more memory clock speed: 5400 MHz vs 1800 MHz
- Around 53% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 455.796 vs 297.631
- Around 60% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 24.566 vs 15.363
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3093 vs 2970
- Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3504 vs 2490
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3093 vs 2970
- Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3504 vs 2490
- 3.1x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2148 vs 702
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 31.36 GTexel / s vs 17.98 GTexel / s |
| Memory clock speed | 5400 MHz vs 1800 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 455.796 vs 297.631 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.566 vs 15.363 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3093 vs 2970 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3504 vs 2490 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3344 vs 3329 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3093 vs 2970 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3504 vs 2490 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3344 vs 3329 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2148 vs 702 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K620
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M
| 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 Quadro K620 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2225 | 1706 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 478 | 326 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6869 | 4935 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 22.112 | 12.449 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 297.631 | 455.796 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.427 | 1.295 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.363 | 24.566 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 99.125 | 28.025 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2970 | 3093 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2490 | 3504 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3329 | 3344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2970 | 3093 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2490 | 3504 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3329 | 3344 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 702 | 2148 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro K620 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Kepler |
| Code name | GM107 | GK107 |
| Launch date | 22 July 2014 | 25 June 2013 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $189.89 | |
| Place in performance rating | 961 | 963 |
| Price now | $189.93 | |
| Type | Workstation | Laptop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 15.23 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1124 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 1058 MHz | 980 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 863.2 gflops | 752.6 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 384 |
| Texture fill rate | 17.98 GTexel / s | 31.36 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 41 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,870 million | 1,270 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort, DVI-I DP | No outputs |
| Number of simultaneous displays | 4 | |
| 7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI | ||
| DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | Up to 3840x2160 | |
| eDP 1.2 signal support | Up to 3840x2160 | |
| HDCP content protection | ||
| HDMI | ||
| LVDS signal support | Up to 1920x1200 | |
| TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming | ||
| VGA аnalog display support | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 160 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
| Width | 1" (2.5 cm) | |
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0 | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12 API |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 5400 MHz |
| Memory type | 128 Bit | GDDR5 |
| Memory bandwidth | 86.4 GB / s | |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
| Standard memory configuration | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Desktop Management | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| 3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
| Blu-Ray 3D Support | ||
| CUDA | ||
| Direct Compute | ||
| FXAA | ||
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
| Optimus | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro K620 with others
NVIDIAQuadro K620 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8410G IGP
NVIDIAQuadro K620 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 755M
NVIDIAQuadro K620 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 800A
NVIDIAQuadro K620 vs
IntelIris Graphics 550
NVIDIAQuadro K620 vs
NVIDIAQuadro M520 Mobile
NVIDIAQuadro K620 vs
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient
