GRID K520Q vs Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitecturePowerVR SGX5 (2008−2011)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameCedar TrailGK104
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 November 2011 (13 years ago)2 July 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,599

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 cores41536
Core clock speedno data745 MHz
Boost clock speed400 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data225 Watt
Texture fill rateno data95.36
Floating-point processing powerno data2.289 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data128

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot

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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data160.0 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectXno data12 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.1.126
CUDA-3.0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 November 2011 2 July 2014
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm

GRID K520Q has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 and GRID K520Q. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 is a notebook card while GRID K520Q 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.


Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600
NVIDIA GRID K520Q
GRID K520Q

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.


2.5 134 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate GRID K520Q 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.