GRID K140Q vs Radeon HD 8970M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 8970M with GRID K140Q, including specs and performance data.
HD 8970M outperforms K140Q by a whopping 433% 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 | 506 | 972 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.18 |
| Power efficiency | 7.11 | 1.03 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | Neptune | GK107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 14 May 2013 (12 years ago) | 28 June 2013 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $125 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 | 1280 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 900 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,800 million | 1,270 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 130 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 72.00 | 13.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.304 TFLOPS | 0.3264 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 16 |
| TMUs | 80 | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 16 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 256 KB |
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 | large | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | IGP |
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 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1200 MHz | 891 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 153.6 GB/s | 28.51 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
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 | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | - | 3.0 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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 | 53
+489%
| 9−10
−489%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 13.89 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+456%
|
9−10
−456%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+486%
|
7−8
−486%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+456%
|
9−10
−456%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 35−40
+443%
|
7−8
−443%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−33
+500%
|
5−6
−500%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+470%
|
10−11
−470%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+486%
|
7−8
−486%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+460%
|
5−6
−460%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+467%
|
6−7
−467%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+469%
|
16−18
−469%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+486%
|
7−8
−486%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+456%
|
9−10
−456%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 148
+448%
|
27−30
−448%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+467%
|
12−14
−467%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 35−40
+443%
|
7−8
−443%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−33
+500%
|
5−6
−500%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+470%
|
10−11
−470%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+486%
|
7−8
−486%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+460%
|
5−6
−460%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 39
+457%
|
7−8
−457%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+467%
|
6−7
−467%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 31
+520%
|
5−6
−520%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+469%
|
16−18
−469%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+486%
|
7−8
−486%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+467%
|
12−14
−467%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 35−40
+443%
|
7−8
−443%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−33
+500%
|
5−6
−500%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+486%
|
7−8
−486%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+467%
|
6−7
−467%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18
+500%
|
3−4
−500%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+469%
|
16−18
−469%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 55−60
+470%
|
10−11
−470%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+500%
|
3−4
−500%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 70−75
+500%
|
12−14
−500%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+550%
|
2−3
−550%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+444%
|
9−10
−444%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+478%
|
18−20
−478%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+475%
|
4−5
−475%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 18−20
+500%
|
3−4
−500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 20−22
+567%
|
3−4
−567%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+450%
|
4−5
−450%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+550%
|
2−3
−550%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 20−22
+567%
|
3−4
−567%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+567%
|
3−4
−567%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+444%
|
9−10
−444%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+467%
|
6−7
−467%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+433%
|
3−4
−433%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
This is how HD 8970M and GRID K140Q compete in popular games:
- HD 8970M is 489% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.22 | 1.73 |
| Recency | 14 May 2013 | 28 June 2013 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 130 Watt |
HD 8970M has a 432.9% higher aggregate performance score, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 30% lower power consumption.
GRID K140Q, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 month.
The Radeon HD 8970M is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID K140Q in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 8970M is a notebook graphics card while GRID K140Q 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.
