GRID K260Q vs Quadro K2100M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2100M with GRID K260Q, including specs and performance data.

K2100M
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
3.09

GRID K260Q outperforms K2100M by a whopping 116% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking774577
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.630.38
Power efficiency4.522.39
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK106GK104
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date23 July 2013 (12 years ago)28 June 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$84.95 $937

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

K2100M has 66% better value for money than GRID K260Q.

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 cores5761536
Core clock speed667 MHz745 MHz
Number of transistors2,540 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate32.0295.36
Floating-point processing power0.7684 TFLOPS2.289 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs48128
L1 Cache48 KB128 KB
L2 Cache256 KB512 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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP

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 width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed752 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth48.0 GB/s160.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.1.126
CUDA+3.0

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

K2100M 3.09
GRID K260Q 6.67
+116%

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.

K2100M Samples: 1588 1368
GRID K260Q Samples: 4 2949
+116%

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 HD24
−108%
50−55
+108%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.54
+429%
18.74
−429%
  • K2100M has 429% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−100%
24−27
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−100%
14−16
+100%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
−100%
16−18
+100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
−100%
24−27
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−100%
24−27
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−100%
14−16
+100%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−110%
21−24
+110%
Fortnite 18−20
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−87.5%
30−33
+87.5%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
−100%
16−18
+100%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
−100%
16−18
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−100%
30−33
+100%
Valorant 45−50
−104%
100−105
+104%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
−100%
24−27
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−100%
24−27
+100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 60−65
−113%
130−140
+113%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−100%
14−16
+100%
Dota 2 30−35
−110%
65−70
+110%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−110%
21−24
+110%
Fortnite 18−20
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−87.5%
30−33
+87.5%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
−100%
16−18
+100%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−11
−110%
21−24
+110%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
−100%
16−18
+100%
Metro Exodus 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−100%
30−33
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
−100%
18−20
+100%
Valorant 45−50
−104%
100−105
+104%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
−100%
24−27
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−100%
14−16
+100%
Dota 2 30−35
−110%
65−70
+110%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−110%
21−24
+110%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−87.5%
30−33
+87.5%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
−100%
16−18
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−100%
30−33
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−90.9%
21−24
+90.9%
Valorant 45−50
−104%
100−105
+104%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−100%
14−16
+100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
−100%
50−55
+100%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−114%
60−65
+114%
Valorant 30−35
−112%
70−75
+112%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−100%
16−18
+100%
Hogwarts Legacy 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−87.5%
30−33
+87.5%
Valorant 16−18
−87.5%
30−33
+87.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Dota 2 10−11
−110%
21−24
+110%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%

This is how K2100M and GRID K260Q compete in popular games:

  • GRID K260Q is 108% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.09 6.67
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 225 Watt

K2100M has 309.1% lower power consumption.

GRID K260Q, on the other hand, has a 115.9% higher aggregate performance score.

The GRID K260Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2100M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K2100M is a mobile workstation graphics card while GRID K260Q is a workstation one.

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 Quadro K2100M
Quadro K2100M
NVIDIA GRID K260Q
GRID K260Q

Other comparisons

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.


3.5 294 votes

Rate Quadro K2100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate GRID K260Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K2100M or GRID K260Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.