Arc B580 vs Quadro K620M

Place in the ranking	788	109
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	93.94
Power efficiency	6.92	14.51
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Xe2 (2024)
GPU code name	GM108	BMG-G21
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	1 March 2015 (9 years ago)	16 January 2025 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

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	384	2560
Core clock speed	1029 MHz	2670 MHz
Boost clock speed	1124 MHz	2670 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	19,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	17.98	427.2
Floating-point processing power	0.8632 TFLOPS	13.67 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	80
TMUs	16	160
Tensor Cores	no data	160
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	20

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).

Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	no data	272 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	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 type	DDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	12 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	2375 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14.4 GB/s	456.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-
Resizable BAR	-	+

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	1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI	-	+
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	+	-
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.

DirectX	12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.6
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.4
CUDA	+	-
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 K620M 3.03

Arc B580 40.22
+1227%

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 K620M 1163

Arc B580 15458
+1229%

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	22 −473%	126 +473%
1440p	5−6 −1260%	68 +1260%
4K	3−4 −1267%	41 +1267%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	1.98
1440p	no data	3.66
4K	no data	6.07

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart	7−8 −2843%	206 +2843%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −1489%	143 +1489%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −1767%	112 +1767%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart	7−8 −2014%	148 +2014%
Battlefield 5	10−11 −1190%	120−130 +1190%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −1200%	117 +1200%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −1517%	97 +1517%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −2783%	173 +2783%
Fortnite	14−16 −980%	160−170 +980%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −929%	140−150 +929%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 −3760%	193 +3760%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 −1038%	140−150 +1038%
Valorant	45−50 −378%	220−230 +378%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart	7−8 −1343%	101 +1343%
Battlefield 5	10−11 −1190%	120−130 +1190%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −1056%	104 +1056%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	50−55 −415%	270−280 +415%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −1267%	82 +1267%
Dota 2	27−30 −1150%	350−400 +1150%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −2567%	160 +2567%
Fortnite	14−16 −980%	160−170 +980%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −929%	140−150 +929%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 −3380%	174 +3380%
Grand Theft Auto V	8−9 −1650%	140 +1650%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −2020%	106 +2020%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 −1038%	140−150 +1038%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −2522%	236 +2522%
Valorant	45−50 −378%	220−230 +378%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 −1190%	120−130 +1190%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −956%	95 +956%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −1183%	77 +1183%
Dota 2	27−30 −1150%	350−400 +1150%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −2383%	149 +2383%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −929%	140−150 +929%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 −1200%	65−70 +1200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 −1038%	140−150 +1038%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −844%	85 +844%
Valorant	45−50 −378%	220−230 +378%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite

14−16

−980%

160−170
+980%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	4−5 −650%	30−33 +650%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	21−24 −1119%	250−260 +1119%
Grand Theft Auto V	2−3 −3350%	69 +3350%
Metro Exodus	0−1	62
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 −695%	170−180 +695%
Valorant	27−30 −833%	250−260 +833%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −2700%	56 +2700%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −2100%	110 +2100%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −1400%	100−110 +1400%
Forza Horizon 5	3−4 −1067%	35−40 +1067%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −1260%	68 +1260%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite

5−6

−1860%

95−100
+1860%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart	2−3 −1400%	30−33 +1400%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −388%	78 +388%
Valorant	14−16 −1521%	220−230 +1521%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −2900%	30 +2900%
Dota 2	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −1867%	59 +1867%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −3400%	70−75 +3400%
Forza Horizon 5	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	4−5 −1125%	45−50 +1125%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite

3−4

−1500%

45−50
+1500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5

95−100

+0%

95−100

+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	46 +0%	46 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	84 +0%	84 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14 +0%	14 +0%

This is how Quadro K620M and Arc B580 compete in popular games:

Arc B580 is 473% faster in 1080p
Arc B580 is 1260% faster in 1440p
Arc B580 is 1267% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Forza Horizon 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Arc B580 is 3760% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Arc B580 is ahead in 54 tests (90%)
there's a draw in 6 tests (10%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.03	40.22
Recency	1 March 2015	16 January 2025
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	12 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	190 Watt

Quadro K620M has 533.3% lower power consumption.

Arc B580, on the other hand, has a 1227.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc B580 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K620M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K620M is a mobile workstation card while Arc B580 is a desktop one.