Quadro4 900 XGL vs Quadro K610M

Place in the ranking	918	1516
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.23	no data
Power efficiency	4.28	no data
Architecture	Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)	Kelvin (2001−2003)
GPU code name	GK208	NV25 A2
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	23 July 2013 (11 years ago)	19 February 2002 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$229.99	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 cores	192	no data
Core clock speed	980 MHz	300 MHz
Number of transistors	915 million	63 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	15.68	2.400
Floating-point processing power	0.3763 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	8	8
TMUs	16	8

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 size	medium sized	no data
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	AGP 4x
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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 type	GDDR5	DDR
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	128 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	650 MHz	325 MHz
Memory bandwidth	20.8 GB/s	10.4 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 Connectors	No outputs	2x DVI, 1x S-Video
Display Port	1.2	no 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 compatibility

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

DirectX	12	8.1
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.5	1.3
OpenCL	1.2	N/A
Vulkan	+	N/A
CUDA	+	-

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. 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.

Quadro K610M 1.86
+18500%

Quadro4 900 XGL 0.01

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 K610M 714
+17750%

Quadro4 900 XGL 4

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 HD

-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p

20.91

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	8−9	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	10−12	0−1
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	8−9	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Dota 2	3−4	0−1
Far Cry 5	12−14	0−1
Fortnite	9−10	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	10−12	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5	0−1
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	18−20	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9	0−1
World of Tanks	35−40	0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	8−9	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Dota 2	3−4	0−1
Far Cry 5	12−14	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	10−12	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	18−20	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1
World of Tanks	12−14	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4	0−1
Far Cry 5	6−7	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6	0−1
Valorant	7−8	0−1

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	5−6	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Dota 2	16−18	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Fortnite	0−1	0−1
Valorant	2−3	0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.86	0.01
Recency	23 July 2013	19 February 2002
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	128 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	150 nm

Quadro K610M has a 18500% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 435.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro K610M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro4 900 XGL in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K610M is a mobile workstation card while Quadro4 900 XGL is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.