NVIDIA Quadro K620 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K620 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 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 5 month(s) later
• Around 4% higher core clock speed: 1058 MHz vs 1020 MHz
• Around 4% higher boost clock speed: 1124 MHz vs 1085 MHz
• Around 34% lower typical power consumption: 41 Watt vs 55 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
• 360x more memory clock speed: 1800 MHz vs 5.0 GB/s
• Around 42% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 99.125 vs 69.814

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750

• Around 93% higher texture fill rate: 34.72 GTexel / s vs 17.98 GTexel / s
• Around 33% higher pipelines: 512 vs 384
• Around 29% better floating-point performance: 1,111 gflops vs 863.2 gflops
• Around 50% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3337 vs 2220
• Around 7% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 515 vs 480
• Around 35% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9306 vs 6869
• Around 55% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 34.239 vs 22.112
• 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 639.427 vs 297.631
• Around 64% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.341 vs 1.427
• 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 32 vs 15.363
• Around 51% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4498 vs 2970
• Around 49% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3704 vs 2490
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3346 vs 3329
• Around 51% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4498 vs 2970
• Around 49% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3704 vs 2490
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3346 vs 3329
• Around 50% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1050 vs 702

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K620
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2220 3337
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	480 515
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	6869 9306
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	22.112 34.239
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	297.631 639.427
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.427 2.341
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	15.363 32
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	99.125 69.814
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2970 4498
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2490 3704
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3329 3346
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2970 4498
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2490 3704
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3329 3346
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	702 1050

Compare specifications (specs)