GRID K280Q vs Extreme Graphics 2

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated530
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.40
Power efficiencyno data2.27
ArchitectureGeneration 2.0 (2002−2003)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameMontaraGK104
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date3 December 2003 (20 years ago)28 June 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,875

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 coresno data1536
Core clock speed200 MHz745 MHz
Boost clock speed266 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data225 Watt
Texture fill rate0.2795.36
Floating-point processing powerno data2.289 TFLOPS
ROPs132
TMUs1128

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 1.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
WidthIGPIGP

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1250 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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX7.012 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGL1.34.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA-3.0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 December 2003 28 June 2013
Chip lithography 130 nm 28 nm

GRID K280Q has an age advantage of 9 years, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Extreme Graphics 2 and GRID K280Q. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Extreme Graphics 2 is a desktop card while GRID K280Q 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.


Intel Extreme Graphics 2
Extreme Graphics 2
NVIDIA GRID K280Q
GRID K280Q

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.


2.4 14 votes

Rate Extreme Graphics 2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate GRID K280Q 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.