NVIDIA Quadro P400 vs NVIDIA Quadro K620

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P400 and NVIDIA Quadro K620 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 P400

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 6 month(s) later
• Around 16% higher core clock speed: 1228 MHz vs 1058 MHz
• Around 11% higher boost clock speed: 1252 MHz vs 1124 MHz
• Around 18% higher texture fill rate: 21.25 GTexel / s vs 17.98 GTexel / s
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 37% lower typical power consumption: 30 Watt vs 41 Watt
• 2.2x more memory clock speed: 4012 MHz vs 1800 MHz
• Around 4% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 309.824 vs 297.631
• Around 63% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 25.011 vs 15.363
• Around 15% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2875 vs 2490
• Around 15% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2875 vs 2490

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K620

• Around 50% higher pipelines: 384 vs 256
• Around 27% better floating-point performance: 863.2 gflops vs 679.9 gflops
• Around 34% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2220 vs 1651
• Around 10% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 480 vs 435
• 2.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 6869 vs 3053
• Around 11% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 22.112 vs 19.856
• Around 3% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.427 vs 1.38
• Around 17% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 99.125 vs 84.489
• Around 10% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2970 vs 2709
• Around 10% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2970 vs 2709
• Around 14% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 702 vs 617

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P400
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K620

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1651 2220
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	435 480
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	3053 6869
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	19.856 22.112
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	309.824 297.631
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.38 1.427
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	25.011 15.363
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	84.489 99.125
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2709 2970
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2875 2490
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3328 3329
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2709 2970
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2875 2490
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3328 3329
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	617 702

Compare specifications (specs)