NVIDIA Quadro P620 vs AMD Radeon R9 M290X
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P620 and AMD Radeon R9 M290X 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P620
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 0 month(s) later
- Around 49% higher core clock speed: 1266 MHz vs 850 MHz
- Around 50% higher boost clock speed: 1354 MHz vs 900 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 2.5x lower typical power consumption: 40 Watt vs 100 Watt
- 4.2x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 1200 MHz
- Around 12% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3636 vs 3256
- Around 27% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 548 vs 430
- Around 50% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3881 vs 2581
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 6631 vs 2526
- Around 50% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3881 vs 2581
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 6631 vs 2526
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 1 February 2018 vs 9 January 2014 |
Core clock speed | 1266 MHz vs 850 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1354 MHz vs 900 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 40 Watt vs 100 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 1200 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3636 vs 3256 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 548 vs 430 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3881 vs 2581 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 6631 vs 2526 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3881 vs 2581 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 6631 vs 2526 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 M290X
- Around 55% higher texture fill rate: 72 GTexel / s vs 46.56 GTexel / s
- 2.5x more pipelines: 1280 vs 512
- Around 55% better floating-point performance: 2,304 gflops vs 1,490 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 88% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 23514 vs 12475
- Around 16% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 51.022 vs 43.877
- Around 21% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 936.497 vs 773.248
- Around 82% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.62 vs 3.082
- Around 45% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 77.584 vs 53.425
- Around 40% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 258.046 vs 184.343
- Around 86% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6666 vs 3575
- Around 86% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6666 vs 3575
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 72 GTexel / s vs 46.56 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1280 vs 512 |
Floating-point performance | 2,304 gflops vs 1,490 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 23514 vs 12475 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 51.022 vs 43.877 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 936.497 vs 773.248 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.62 vs 3.082 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 77.584 vs 53.425 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 258.046 vs 184.343 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6666 vs 3575 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6666 vs 3575 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P620
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 M290X
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) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA Quadro P620 | AMD Radeon R9 M290X |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3636 | 3256 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 548 | 430 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 12475 | 23514 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 43.877 | 51.022 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 773.248 | 936.497 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.082 | 5.62 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.425 | 77.584 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 184.343 | 258.046 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3575 | 6666 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3881 | 2581 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 6631 | 2526 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3575 | 6666 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3881 | 2581 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 6631 | 2526 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA Quadro P620 | AMD Radeon R9 M290X | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Pascal | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | GP107 | Neptune |
Launch date | 1 February 2018 | 9 January 2014 |
Place in performance rating | 597 | 598 |
Price now | $176.99 | |
Type | Workstation | Desktop |
Value for money (0-100) | 25.53 | |
Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1354 MHz | 900 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1266 MHz | 850 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 1,490 gflops | 2,304 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 512 | 1280 |
Texture fill rate | 46.56 GTexel / s | 72 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 40 Watt | 100 Watt |
Transistor count | 3,300 million | 2,800 million |
Compute units | 20 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 4x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
Eyefinity | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 145 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 11 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
Mantle | ||
OpenCL | Not Listed | |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 64.19 GB / s | 153.6 GB/s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 bit |
Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 1200 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
DualGraphics | ||
FreeSync | ||
HD3D | ||
PowerTune | ||
Switchable graphics | ||
ZeroCore |