GRID K160Q vs GeForce GT 520 PCI

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated950
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.21
Power efficiencyno data0.87
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGF119GK107
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date13 April 2011 (13 years ago)28 June 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$125

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 cores48192
Core clock speed810 MHz850 MHz
Number of transistors292 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)29 Watt130 Watt
Texture fill rate6.48013.60
Floating-point processing power0.1555 TFLOPS0.3264 TFLOPS
ROPs416
TMUs816

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).

InterfacePCIPCIe 3.0 x16
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz891 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s28.51 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGANo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA2.13.0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 13 April 2011 28 June 2013
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 29 Watt 130 Watt

GT 520 PCI has 348.3% lower power consumption.

GRID K160Q, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 520 PCI and GRID K160Q. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GT 520 PCI is a desktop card while GRID K160Q 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.


NVIDIA GeForce GT 520 PCI
GeForce GT 520 PCI
NVIDIA GRID K160Q
GRID K160Q

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.


2.9 12 votes

Rate GeForce GT 520 PCI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate GRID K160Q 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.