GRID K240Q vs GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition with GRID K240Q, including specs and performance data.
K240Q outperforms 660M Mac Edition by a whopping 311% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1020 | 627 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.56 |
| Power efficiency | 2.27 | 2.07 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | GK107 | GK104 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 1 April 2013 (12 years ago) | 28 June 2013 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $469 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 | 384 | 1536 |
| Core clock speed | 950 MHz | 745 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,270 million | 3,540 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 30.40 | 95.36 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.7296 TFLOPS | 2.289 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 32 |
| TMUs | 32 | 128 |
| L1 Cache | 32 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 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).
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 80 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |
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 | No outputs | No outputs |
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 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | 3.0 | 3.0 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.40 | 5.75 |
| Recency | 1 April 2013 | 28 June 2013 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 1 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 225 Watt |
GTX 660M Mac Edition has 350% lower power consumption.
GRID K240Q, on the other hand, has a 310.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 months, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
The GRID K240Q is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition is a notebook graphics card while GRID K240Q is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
