Radeon HD 8310G vs GRID K520

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking472not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.35no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)
GPU code nameGK104Trinity
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)23 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,599 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1536128
Core clock speed745 MHz424 MHz
Boost clock speedno data554 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million1,303 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate95.365.760
Floating-point performance2.289 gflops0.1843 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16IGP
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed5000 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/sno data
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 graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA3.0-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 July 2013 23 May 2013
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 20 Watt

GRID K520 has an age advantage of 2 months, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

HD 8310G, on the other hand, has 1025% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GRID K520 and Radeon HD 8310G. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GRID K520 is a workstation card while Radeon HD 8310G is a notebook 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.


NVIDIA GRID K520
GRID K520
AMD Radeon HD 8310G
Radeon HD 8310G

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.


2.3 3 votes

Rate GRID K520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Radeon HD 8310G 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.