Arc A770 vs Quadro K600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GRID K1 GRID K100 GRID K120Q GRID K160Q GRID K340 NVS 510 NVS 1000 Quadro 410 Quadro K420 Quadro K600 Quadro K2000 Quadro K2000D
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Arc 7 A770M Arc 7 A780 Arc A580 Arc A750 Arc A770 Arc A780

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K600 with Arc A770, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K600
2013
1 GB DDR3, 41 Watt
1.85

Arc A770 outperforms K600 by a whopping 1709% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Quadro K600 Quadro K600
Arc A770 Arc A770

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking917155
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.2755.61
Power efficiency3.1810.45
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGK107DG2-512
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date1 March 2013 (11 years ago)12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

Arc A770 has 20496% better value for money than Quadro K600.

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 cores1924096
Core clock speed876 MHz2100 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2400 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)41 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate14.02614.4
Floating-point processing power0.3364 TFLOPS19.66 TFLOPS
ROPs16128
TMUs16256
Tensor Coresno data512
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length160 mmno data
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB16 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed891 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.51 GB/s512.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.3
CUDA3.0-
DLSS-+

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.

Quadro K600 1.85
Arc A770 33.47
+1709%

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.

Quadro K600 729
Arc A770 13172
+1707%

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 HD6−7
−1750%
111
+1750%
1440p3−4
−1967%
62
+1967%
4K2−3
−1900%
40
+1900%

Cost per frame, $

1080p33.17
−1019%
2.96
+1019%
1440p66.33
−1150%
5.31
+1150%
4K99.50
−1110%
8.23
+1110%
  • Arc A770 has 1019% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • Arc A770 has 1150% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • Arc A770 has 1110% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 179
+0%
179
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 116
+0%
116
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
+0%
78
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 132
+0%
132
+0%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 99
+0%
99
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 70
+0%
70
+0%
Far Cry 5 117
+0%
117
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 139
+0%
139
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 99
+0%
99
+0%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 88
+0%
88
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 61
+0%
61
+0%
Far Cry 5 109
+0%
109
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 31
+0%
31
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 127
+0%
127
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 105
+0%
105
+0%
Metro Exodus 113
+0%
113
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 196
+0%
196
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 83
+0%
83
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 58
+0%
58
+0%
Far Cry 5 104
+0%
104
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 23
+0%
23
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 72
+0%
72
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45
+0%
45
+0%
Metro Exodus 71
+0%
71
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45
+0%
45
+0%
Far Cry 5 82
+0%
82
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 15
+0%
15
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60
+0%
60
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10
+0%
10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 48
+0%
48
+0%
Metro Exodus 47
+0%
47
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 73
+0%
73
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 15
+0%
15
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 26
+0%
26
+0%
Far Cry 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8
+0%
8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

This is how Quadro K600 and Arc A770 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A770 is 1750% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A770 is 1967% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A770 is 1900% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 1.85 33.47
Recency 1 March 2013 12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 41 Watt 225 Watt

Quadro K600 has 448.8% lower power consumption.

Arc A770, on the other hand, has a 1709.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A770 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K600 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K600 is a workstation graphics card while Arc A770 is a desktop 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 K600
Quadro K600
Intel Arc A770
Arc A770
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Quadro K600 Quadro K600
vs
GRID K140Q GRID K140Q
Arc A770 Arc A770
vs
RX Vega 56 Radeon RX Vega 56
Quadro K600 Quadro K600
vs
Quadro K420 Quadro K420
T600 T600
vs
Quadro K600 Quadro K600
RTX A2000 RTX A2000
vs
Quadro K600 Quadro K600
UHD Graphics 770 UHD Graphics 770
vs
Quadro K600 Quadro K600
RTX A2000 12 GB RTX A2000 12 GB
vs
Quadro K600 Quadro K600
RTX 4090 GeForce RTX 4090
vs
Quadro K600 Quadro K600
RTX 3060 8 GB GeForce RTX 3060 8 GB
vs
Quadro K600 Quadro K600
RTX 3060 Ti GeForce RTX 3060 Ti
vs
Tesla K20s Tesla K20s
RTX 4070 GeForce RTX 4070
vs
Tesla K20s Tesla K20s
Tesla K20X Tesla K20X
vs
K5000 SYNC Quadro K5000 SYNC
ATI 2460 Multi-View FirePro 2460 Multi-View
vs
K5000 SYNC Quadro K5000 SYNC

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

2.7 199 votes

Rate Quadro K600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 5380 votes

Rate Arc A770 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K600 or Arc A770, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.