Radeon R7 240 OEM vs Quadro K600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking909not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.26no data
Power efficiency3.18no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGK107Oland
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date1 March 2013 (11 years ago)1 November 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores192320
Core clock speed876 MHz730 MHz
Boost clock speedno data780 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)41 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate14.0215.60
Floating-point processing power0.3364 TFLOPS0.4992 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs1620

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 3.0 x8
Length160 mmno data
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed891 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.51 GB/s28.8 GB/s

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 DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA3.0-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 March 2013 1 November 2013
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 41 Watt 50 Watt

Quadro K600 has 22% lower power consumption.

R7 240 OEM, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 months, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

We couldn't decide between Quadro K600 and Radeon R7 240 OEM. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro K600 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R7 240 OEM is a desktop 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 Quadro K600
Quadro K600
AMD Radeon R7 240 OEM
Radeon R7 240 OEM

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.


2.8 198 votes

Rate Quadro K600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 47 votes

Rate Radeon R7 240 OEM 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.