Radeon E9172 MXM vs GRID K520
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 450 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.41 | no data |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) |
| GPU code name | GK104 | Lexa |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 23 July 2013 (11 years ago) | 3 October 2017 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,599 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1536 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 745 MHz | 1124 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1219 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,540 million | 2,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 95.36 | 39.01 |
| Floating-point performance | 2x 2,448 gflops | 1,248 gflops |
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 3.0 x16 | MXM-A (3.0) |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | MXM Module |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | None |
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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz | 6000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 48 GB/s |
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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | 3.0 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 23 July 2013 | 3 October 2017 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | 35 Watt |
GRID K520 has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
E9172 MXM, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 542.9% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between GRID K520 and Radeon E9172 MXM. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that GRID K520 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon E9172 MXM is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
