Quadro P620 vs GeForce 705M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 705M with Quadro P620, including specs and performance data.
P620 outperforms 705M by a whopping 716% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1146 | 541 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 5.64 | 17.30 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | GF119 | GP107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 27 September 2013 (13 years ago) | 1 February 2018 (8 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 48 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 475 MHz | 1177 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1443 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 292 million | 3,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 40 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 3.800 | 46.18 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.0912 TFLOPS | 1.478 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 16 |
| TMUs | 8 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 192 KB |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 1024 KB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Bus support | PCI Express 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 145 mm |
| Width | no data | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Standard memory configuration | DDR3 | no data |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 1502 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | 96.13 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |
| eDP 1.2 signal support | Up to 2560x1600 | no data |
| LVDS signal support | Up to 1920x1200 | no data |
| VGA аnalog display support | Up to 2048x1536 | no data |
| DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | Up to 2560x1600 | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| HDCP content protection | + | - |
| 7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI | + | - |
| TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Blu-Ray 3D Support | + | - |
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | + | - |
| Optimus | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 API | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | + | 6.1 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 5−6
−89.4%
| 47 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 3−4 | 21−24
+633%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 18−20
+800%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 3−4 | 21−24
+633%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 40−45 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 18−20
+800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 27−30
+2800%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 113
+5550%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7 | 35−40
+550%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10 | 30−35
+256%
|
| Valorant | 30−35 | 85−90
+156%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 3−4 | 21−24
+633%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 40−45 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27 | 130−140
+431%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 18−20
+800%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16 | 90
+500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 27−30
+2800%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 42
+2000%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7 | 35−40
+550%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 17
+1600%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10 | 30−35
+256%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8 | 32
+357%
|
| Valorant | 30−35 | 85−90
+156%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 40−45 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 18−20
+800%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16 | 83
+453%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 27−30
+2800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7 | 35−40
+550%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10 | 30−35
+256%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8 | 17
+143%
|
| Valorant | 30−35 | 85−90
+156%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 29
+1350%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4 | 16−18
+467%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 7−8 | 65−70
+886%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12 | 45−50
+327%
|
| Valorant | 6−7 | 85−90
+1383%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 7−8 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 18−20 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3 | 21−24
+950%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3 | 12−14
+500%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 18−20
+1800%
|
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 0−1 | 7−8 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16 | 18−20
+26.7%
|
| Valorant | 7−8 | 40−45
+471%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3 | 9−10
+350%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 8−9
+300%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 16−18 | 16−18 |
Full HD
Medium
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50 | 45−50 |
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35 | 30−35 |
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14 | 12−14 |
| Metro Exodus | 10−11 | 10−11 |
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24 | 21−24 |
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Metro Exodus | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11 | 10−11 |
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 10−11 | 10−11 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Dota 2 | 30−35 | 30−35 |
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10 | 9−10 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16 | 14−16 |
This is how GeForce 705M and Quadro P620 compete in popular games:
- Quadro P620 is 840% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro P620 is 5550% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Quadro P620 performs better in 39 tests (70%)
- there's a draw in 17 tests (30%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.09 | 8.89 |
| Recency | 27 September 2013 | 1 February 2018 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 40 Watt |
GeForce 705M has 63% lower power consumption.
Quadro P620, on the other hand, has a 716% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 65% more advanced lithography process.
The Quadro P620 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 705M in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce 705M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro P620 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
