RTX A2000 Mobile vs GRID K520

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GRID K2 GRID K260Q GRID K520 Quadro K4200 Quadro K5000 Tesla K10
VS
RTX A1000 Mobile RTX A2000 Embedded RTX A2000 Max-Q RTX A2000 Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GRID K520 with RTX A2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GRID K520
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
9.13

RTX A2000 Mobile outperforms GRID K520 by a whopping 181% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GRID K520 GRID K520
RTX A2000 Mobile RTX A2000 Mobile

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking479212
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.34no data
Power efficiency2.7818.53
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGK104GA106
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)12 April 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,599 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores15362560
Core clock speed745 MHz893 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1358 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million13,250 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt95 Watt
Texture fill rate95.36108.6
Floating-point processing power2.289 TFLOPS6.953 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs12880
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Coresno data20

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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/s176.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2
CUDA3.08.6

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GRID K520 9.13
RTX A2000 Mobile 25.66
+181%

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.

GRID K520 3516
RTX A2000 Mobile 9884
+181%

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 HD27−30
−193%
79
+193%
1440p14−16
−200%
42
+200%
4K12−14
−200%
36
+200%

Cost per frame, $

1080p133.30no data
1440p257.07no data
4K299.92no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 74
+0%
74
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55
+0%
55
+0%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 62
+0%
62
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Hitman 3 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 39
+0%
39
+0%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50
+0%
50
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Hitman 3 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 108
+0%
108
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 32
+0%
32
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 41
+0%
41
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Hitman 3 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 94
+0%
94
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50
+0%
50
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 29
+0%
29
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27
+0%
27
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 25
+0%
25
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Hitman 3 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 49
+0%
49
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 63
+0%
63
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hitman 3 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 33
+0%
33
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35
+0%
35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

This is how GRID K520 and RTX A2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX A2000 Mobile is 193% faster in 1080p
  • RTX A2000 Mobile is 200% faster in 1440p
  • RTX A2000 Mobile is 200% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 9.13 25.66
Recency 23 July 2013 12 April 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 95 Watt

RTX A2000 Mobile has a 181.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 136.8% lower power consumption.

The RTX A2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID K520 in performance tests.

Be aware that GRID K520 is a workstation card while RTX A2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.

NVIDIA GRID K520
GRID K520
NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile
RTX A2000 Mobile
Like
Like

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

GRID K520 GRID K520
vs
Quadro 7000 Quadro 7000
RTX A2000 Mobile RTX A2000 Mobile
vs
Quadro P4200 Quadro P4200
GRID K520 GRID K520
vs
Quadro K2200 Quadro K2200
GRID K520 GRID K520
vs
GRID M60-2Q GRID M60 2Q
GRID K520 GRID K520
vs
STG STG
GRID K520 GRID K520
vs
GTX 1070 GDDR5X GeForce GTX 1070 GDDR5X
GRID K520 GRID K520
vs
RTX 3060 Mobile GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile
GRID K520 GRID K520
vs
UHD Graphics G4 UHD Graphics G4
GRID K520 GRID K520
vs
RTX 3090 Ti GeForce RTX 3090 Ti
GRID K520 GRID K520
vs
RTX 3070 TiM GeForce RTX 3070 TiM
GRID K520 GRID K520
vs
RX 6750 GRE Radeon RX 6750 GRE
GRID K520 GRID K520
vs
RTX 4060 Ti AD104 GeForce RTX 4060 Ti AD104
GRID K520 GRID K520
vs
RTX 5060 GeForce RTX 5060

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

2.3 3 votes

Rate GRID K520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 93 votes

Rate RTX A2000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.