GRID K100 vs Radeon RX Vega 64

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking173not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation16.49no data
Power efficiency8.68no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameVega 10GK107
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date7 August 2017 (8 years ago)28 June 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 $63

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores4096192
Core clock speed1247 MHz850 MHz
Boost clock speed1546 MHzno data
Number of transistors12,500 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)295 Watt130 Watt
Texture fill rate395.813.60
Floating-point processing power12.66 TFLOPS0.3264 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs25616
L1 Cache1 MB16 KB
L2 Cache4 MB256 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length279 mmno data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinno 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 typeHBM2DDR3
Maximum RAM amount8 GB256 MB
Memory bus width2048 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed945 MHz891 MHz
Memory bandwidth483.8 GB/s28.51 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.1.1251.1.126
CUDA-3.0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 August 2017 28 June 2013
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 295 Watt 130 Watt

RX Vega 64 has an age advantage of 4 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

GRID K100, on the other hand, has 126.9% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 64 and GRID K100. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 64 is a desktop graphics card while GRID K100 is a workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon RX Vega 64
Radeon RX Vega 64
NVIDIA GRID K100
GRID K100

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.3 846 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate GRID K100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 64 or GRID K100, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.