GRID K1 vs GeForce 410M

Place in the ranking	1238	999
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	4.13	0.92
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	GF119	GK107
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	5 January 2011 (14 years ago)	18 March 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$4,140

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores	48	192 ×4
Core clock speed	575 MHz	850 MHz
Number of transistors	292 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12 Watt	130 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.600	13.60 ×4
Floating-point processing power	0.1104 TFLOPS	0.3264 TFLOPS ×4
Gigaflops	73	no data
ROPs	4	16 ×4
TMUs	8	16 ×4
L1 Cache	64 KB	16 KB
L2 Cache	128 KB	256 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-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 6-pin

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	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	Up to 512 MB	4 GB ×4
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit ×4
Memory clock speed	Up to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz	891 MHz
Memory bandwidth	12.8 GB/s	28.51 GB/s ×4
Shared memory	-	no data

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	DisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power management

8.0

no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	+	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.1.126
CUDA	+	3.0

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.

GeForce 410M 0.64

GRID K1 1.54
+141%

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.

GeForce 410M 272
Samples: 490

GRID K1 650
+139%

Samples: 14

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

−125%

18−20
+125%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

230.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077

2−3

−100%

4−5
+100%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Escape from Tarkov	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%
Valorant	27−30 −132%	65−70 +132%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	18−20 −137%	45−50 +137%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Dota 2	12−14 −125%	27−30 +125%
Escape from Tarkov	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −133%	14−16 +133%
Valorant	27−30 −132%	65−70 +132%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Dota 2	12−14 −125%	27−30 +125%
Escape from Tarkov	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −133%	14−16 +133%
Valorant	27−30 −132%	65−70 +132%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 −129%	16−18 +129%

1440p
Ultra

Escape from Tarkov	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite

1−2

−100%

2−3
+100%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −114%	30−33 +114%
Valorant	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

2−3

−100%

4−5
+100%

4K
Epic

Fortnite

2−3

−100%

4−5
+100%

This is how GeForce 410M and GRID K1 compete in popular games:

GRID K1 is 125% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.64	1.54
Recency	5 January 2011	18 March 2013
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12 Watt	130 Watt

GeForce 410M has 983.3% lower power consumption.

GRID K1, on the other hand, has a 140.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The GRID K1 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 410M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 410M is a notebook graphics card while GRID K1 is a workstation one.