GRID K180Q vs ATI Radeon HD 3850
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 3850 with GRID K180Q, including specs and performance data.
GRID K180Q outperforms ATI HD 3850 by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1147 | 1056 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.04 | 0.09 |
| Power efficiency | 0.98 | 0.74 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | RV670 | GK107 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 19 November 2007 (17 years ago) | 28 June 2013 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $179 | $125 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
GRID K180Q has 125% better value for money than ATI HD 3850.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 320 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 668 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 666 million | 1,270 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 130 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 10.69 | 13.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.4275 TFLOPS | 0.3264 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 16 | 16 |
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 | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 208 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 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 | GDDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 830 MHz | 891 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 53.12 GB/s | 28.51 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | - | 3.0 |
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.
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.
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 | 0.96 | 1.27 |
| Recency | 19 November 2007 | 28 June 2013 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 130 Watt |
ATI HD 3850 has 73.3% lower power consumption.
GRID K180Q, on the other hand, has a 32.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.
The GRID K180Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 3850 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 3850 is a desktop graphics card while GRID K180Q is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
