GMA X3100 vs GRID K520Q

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 4.0 (2006−2007)
GPU code nameGK104Broadwater
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date2 July 2014 (10 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,599 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 cores1536no data
Core clock speed745 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rate95.364.000
Floating-point processing power2.289 TFLOPSno data
ROPs321
TMUs1288

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno 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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1250 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/sno data
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)9.0c
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA3.0-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 2 July 2014 9 May 2007
Chip lithography 28 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 13 Watt

GRID K520Q has an age advantage of 7 years, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

GMA X3100, on the other hand, has 1630.8% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GRID K520Q and GMA X3100. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GRID K520Q is a workstation card while GMA X3100 is a notebook 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 K520Q
GRID K520Q
Intel GMA X3100
GMA X3100

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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

Community ratings

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


No user ratings yet.

Rate GRID K520Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 57 votes

Rate GMA X3100 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.