Quadro K620 vs GeForce GTX 880M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
SLI
VS

Aggregate performance score

GTX 880M
2014
8 GB GDDR5, 122 Watt
9.84
+70.5%

GeForce GTX 880M outperforms Quadro K620 by an impressive 71% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking421563
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.971.24
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameN15E-GX-A2GM107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date12 March 2014 (10 years ago)22 July 2014 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$189.89
Current price$1544 $286 (1.5x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro K620 has 28% better value for money than GTX 880M.

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 cores1536384
CUDA cores1536no data
Core clock speed954 MHz1058 MHz
Boost clock speed993 MHz1124 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)122 Watt41 Watt
Texture fill rate127.126.98
Floating-point performance3,050 gflops863.2 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 880M and Quadro K620 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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data160 mm
Widthno data1" (2.5 cm)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone
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 typeGDDR5128 Bit
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2 GB
Standard memory configurationGDDR5no data
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 2500 MHz1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/sUp to 29 GB/s
Shared memory-no 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 ConnectorsNo outputsDVI-I DP
Number of simultaneous displaysno data4
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI+no data
HDCP content protection+no data
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+no data
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+no data

Supported technologies

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

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+no data
Optimus+no data
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Desktop Managementno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12
Shader Model5.15
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
CUDA+5.0

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 880M 9.84
+70.5%
Quadro K620 5.77

GeForce GTX 880M outperforms Quadro K620 by 71% 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 880M 3803
+70.4%
Quadro K620 2232

GeForce GTX 880M outperforms Quadro K620 by 70% in Passmark.

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 880M 14912
+125%
Quadro K620 6615

GeForce GTX 880M outperforms Quadro K620 by 125% 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 880M 13675
+133%
Quadro K620 5878

GeForce GTX 880M outperforms Quadro K620 by 133% 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 880M 10249
+54.1%
Quadro K620 6653

GeForce GTX 880M outperforms Quadro K620 by 54% 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 880M 44
+132%
Quadro K620 19

GeForce GTX 880M outperforms Quadro K620 by 132% 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:

900p135
+80%
75−80
−80%
Full HD56
+86.7%
30−35
−86.7%
4K24
+71.4%
14−16
−71.4%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+72.2%
18−20
−72.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+75%
12−14
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+81.3%
16−18
−81.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+92.9%
14−16
−92.9%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+88.9%
18−20
−88.9%
Hitman 3 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+83.3%
18−20
−83.3%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+81.3%
16−18
−81.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+75%
16−18
−75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+75%
16−18
−75%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+72.2%
18−20
−72.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+75%
12−14
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+81.3%
16−18
−81.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+92.9%
14−16
−92.9%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+88.9%
18−20
−88.9%
Hitman 3 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+83.3%
18−20
−83.3%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+81.3%
16−18
−81.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+75%
16−18
−75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+75%
16−18
−75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 34
+88.9%
18−20
−88.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+75%
12−14
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+81.3%
16−18
−81.3%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+88.9%
18−20
−88.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+83.3%
18−20
−83.3%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+81.3%
16−18
−81.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+90%
10−11
−90%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+75%
16−18
−75%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+90%
10−11
−90%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Hitman 3 12−14
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+80%
10−11
−80%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5 21−24
+91.7%
12−14
−91.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Hitman 3 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Battlefield 5 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%

This is how GTX 880M and Quadro K620 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 880M is 80% faster in 900p
  • GTX 880M is 87% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 880M is 71% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.84 5.77
Recency 12 March 2014 22 July 2014
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 122 Watt 41 Watt

The GeForce GTX 880M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K620 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 880M is a notebook card while Quadro K620 is a 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 880M
GeForce GTX 880M
NVIDIA Quadro K620
Quadro K620

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.


3.8 105 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 880M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 567 votes

Rate Quadro K620 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.