GeForce GTX 280M SLI vs Quadro K620
Aggregate performance score
Quadro K620 outperforms GeForce GTX 280M SLI by an impressive 73% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 563 | 704 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.23 | 1.02 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2018) | G9x (2007−2010) |
| GPU code name | GM107 | N10E-GTX |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 22 July 2014 (9 years ago) | 2 March 2009 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $189.89 | no data |
| Current price | $286 (1.5x MSRP) | $149 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Quadro K620 has 21% better value for money than GTX 280M SLI.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 384 | 256 |
| Core clock speed | 1058 MHz | 585 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1124 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,870 million | 1508 Million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 41 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 26.98 | no data |
| Floating-point performance | 863.2 gflops | no data |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Quadro K620 and GeForce GTX 280M SLI compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | no data |
| Length | 160 mm | no data |
| Width | 1" (2.5 cm) | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
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 | 128 Bit | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 950 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | Up to 29 GB/s | no data |
| 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 | DVI-I DP | no data |
| Number of simultaneous displays | 4 | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| 3D Vision Pro | + | no data |
| Mosaic | + | no data |
| nView Desktop Management | + | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 | 10 |
| Shader Model | 5 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
| Vulkan | + | no data |
| CUDA | 5.0 | + |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 5.77 | 3.33 |
| Recency | 22 July 2014 | 2 March 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 41 Watt | 150 Watt |
The Quadro K620 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 280M SLI in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro K620 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 280M SLI is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
