Quadro K2100M vs GeForce GTX 660

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 660 with Quadro K2100M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 660
2012
2 GB GDDR5, 140 Watt
10.36
+194%

GTX 660 outperforms K2100M by a whopping 194% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking405687
Place by popularity70not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.420.62
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK106GK106
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date6 September 2012 (11 years ago)23 July 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 $84.95
Current price$172 (0.8x MSRP)$208 (2.4x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 660 has 290% better value for money than K2100M.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores960576
CUDA cores960no data
Core clock speed980 MHz667 MHz
Boost clock speed1033 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,540 million2,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)140 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate78.4 billion/sec32.02
Floating-point performance1,981 gflops768.4 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 660 and Quadro K2100M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length9.5" (24.1 cm)no data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsOne 6-pinno data
SLI options+no 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width192-bit GDDR5128 Bit
Memory clock speed6.0 GB/s3000 MHz
Memory bandwidth144.2 GB/s48.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPortNo outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+no data
HDCP+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Display Portno data1.2
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray+no data
3D Gaming+no data
3D Vision+no data
Optimusno data+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12
Shader Model5.15
OpenGL4.34.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

GTX 660 10.36
+194%
K2100M 3.52

GeForce GTX 660 outperforms Quadro K2100M by 194% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 660 3999
+194%
K2100M 1358

GeForce GTX 660 outperforms Quadro K2100M by 194% in Passmark.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 660 5040
+214%
K2100M 1606

GeForce GTX 660 outperforms Quadro K2100M by 214% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GTX 660 11296
+151%
K2100M 4506

GeForce GTX 660 outperforms Quadro K2100M by 151% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

GTX 660 11469
+179%
K2100M 4106

GeForce GTX 660 outperforms Quadro K2100M by 179% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 660 8583
+183%
K2100M 3028

GeForce GTX 660 outperforms Quadro K2100M by 183% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 660 33
+200%
K2100M 11

GeForce GTX 660 outperforms Quadro K2100M by 200% in Octane Render OctaneBench.

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 HD47
+74.1%
27
−74.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Hitman 3 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+200%
7−8
−200%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Hitman 3 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+200%
7−8
−200%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+200%
7−8
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Hitman 3 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

This is how GTX 660 and K2100M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 660 is 74% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.36 3.52
Recency 6 September 2012 23 July 2013
Cost $229 $84.95
Power consumption (TDP) 140 Watt 55 Watt

The GeForce GTX 660 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2100M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 660 is a desktop card while Quadro K2100M 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 GTX 660
GeForce GTX 660
NVIDIA Quadro K2100M
Quadro K2100M

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.


3.7 4025 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 660 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 266 votes

Rate Quadro K2100M 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.