Quadro K2100M vs GeForce GTX 680

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 680 with Quadro K2100M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 680
2012
2048 MB GDDR5, 195 Watt
14.43
+310%

GTX 680 outperforms K2100M by a whopping 310% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking359721
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.950.63
Power efficiency5.124.43
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK104GK106
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date22 March 2012 (12 years ago)23 July 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 $84.95

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 680 has 368% better value for money than K2100M.

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 cores1536576
Core clock speed1006 MHz667 MHz
Boost clock speed1058 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 million2,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)195 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate135.432.02
Floating-point processing power3.25 TFLOPS0.7684 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs12848

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length254 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 amount2048 MB2 GB
Memory bus width256-bit GDDR5128 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz752 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.2 GB/s48.0 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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPortNo outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
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.

Optimus-+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.24.5
OpenCL1.21.2
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.

GTX 680 14.43
+310%
K2100M 3.52

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.

GTX 680 5565
+310%
K2100M 1357

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.

GTX 680 10217
+327%
K2100M 2394

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.

GTX 680 29702
+179%
K2100M 10648

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.

GTX 680 7587
+372%
K2100M 1606

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 680 47130
+298%
K2100M 11835

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.

GTX 680 18407
+305%
K2100M 4547

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.

GTX 680 17566
+328%
K2100M 4104

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.

GTX 680 13248
+338%
K2100M 3028

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.

GTX 680 54
+391%
K2100M 11

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:

900p45
+350%
10−12
−350%
Full HD75
+226%
23
−226%
4K24
+380%
5−6
−380%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.653.69
4K20.7916.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+267%
6−7
−267%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+230%
10−11
−230%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+571%
7−8
−571%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+267%
6−7
−267%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+386%
7−8
−386%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+290%
10−11
−290%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+370%
20−22
−370%
Hitman 3 27−30
+200%
9−10
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+196%
24−27
−196%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+717%
6−7
−717%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+344%
9−10
−344%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+236%
14−16
−236%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+85.4%
40−45
−85.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+230%
10−11
−230%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+571%
7−8
−571%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+267%
6−7
−267%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+386%
7−8
−386%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+290%
10−11
−290%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+370%
20−22
−370%
Hitman 3 27−30
+200%
9−10
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+196%
24−27
−196%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+717%
6−7
−717%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+344%
9−10
−344%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+236%
14−16
−236%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 94
+276%
25
−276%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+85.4%
40−45
−85.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+230%
10−11
−230%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+267%
6−7
−267%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+386%
7−8
−386%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+370%
20−22
−370%
Hitman 3 27−30
+200%
9−10
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+196%
24−27
−196%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+236%
14−16
−236%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+46.7%
14−16
−46.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+85.4%
40−45
−85.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+344%
9−10
−344%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+340%
5−6
−340%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+7300%
1−2
−7300%
Hitman 3 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+317%
6−7
−317%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+317%
6−7
−317%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+305%
21−24
−305%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+243%
7−8
−243%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Hitman 3 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+344%
16−18
−344%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
+433%
3−4
−433%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%

This is how GTX 680 and K2100M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 680 is 350% faster in 900p
  • GTX 680 is 226% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 680 is 380% faster in 4K

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 680 is 7300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 680 surpassed K2100M in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.43 3.52
Recency 22 March 2012 23 July 2013
Power consumption (TDP) 195 Watt 55 Watt

GTX 680 has a 309.9% higher aggregate performance score.

K2100M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 254.5% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 680 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2100M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 680 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 680
GeForce GTX 680
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.


3.8 574 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 279 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.