Quadro K1000M vs GeForce GT 645M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 645M with Quadro K1000M, including specs and performance data.

GT 645M
2012
2 GB DDR3\GDDR5, 32 Watt
2.43
+20.3%

GT 645M outperforms K1000M by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking844893
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.50
Power efficiency5.233.09
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK107GK107
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date1 October 2012 (12 years ago)1 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$119.90

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 cores384192
Core clock speedUp to 710 MHz850 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)32 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate22.6913.60
Floating-point processing power0.5445 TFLOPS0.3264 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs3216

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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)

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 typeDDR3\GDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 64.0 GB/s28.8 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
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolutionUp to 2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray+-
Optimus++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
CUDA++

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.

GT 645M 2.43
+20.3%
K1000M 2.02

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.

GT 645M 933
+20.4%
K1000M 775

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GT 645M 1845
+67.4%
K1000M 1102

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 645M 7357
+42.4%
K1000M 5165

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GT 645M 2683
+54.2%
K1000M 1740

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

GT 645M 9
+80%
K1000M 5

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:

900p30
+233%
9
−233%
Full HD23
+43.8%
16
−43.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data7.49

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Elden Ring 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Dota 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Elden Ring 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+15.4%
12−14
−15.4%
Fortnite 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+15%
20−22
−15%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
World of Tanks 58
+48.7%
35−40
−48.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Dota 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+15.4%
12−14
−15.4%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+15%
20−22
−15%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+30.8%
12−14
−30.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
World of Tanks 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Valorant 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Fortnite 1−2 0−1
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how GT 645M and K1000M compete in popular games:

  • GT 645M is 233% faster in 900p
  • GT 645M is 44% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Elden Ring, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 645M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 645M is ahead in 34 tests (69%)
  • there's a draw in 15 tests (31%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.43 2.02
Recency 1 October 2012 1 June 2012
Power consumption (TDP) 32 Watt 45 Watt

GT 645M has a 20.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, and 40.6% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 645M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K1000M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 645M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K1000M 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 GeForce GT 645M
GeForce GT 645M
NVIDIA Quadro K1000M
Quadro K1000M

Other comparisons

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.


3.5 97 votes

Rate GeForce GT 645M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 88 votes

Rate Quadro K1000M 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.