GRID K200 vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking658not rated
Place by popularity30not in top-100
Power efficiency20.91no data
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameVega Raven RidgeGK104
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date26 October 2017 (7 years ago)28 June 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$235

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 cores5121536
Core clock speedno data745 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rateno data95.36
Floating-point processing powerno data2.289 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data128

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data256 MB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data160.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.1.126
CUDA-3.0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 26 October 2017 28 June 2013
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 225 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) has an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 1400% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and GRID K200. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a notebook card while GRID K200 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
NVIDIA GRID K200
GRID K200

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.5 1400 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate GRID K200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.