GRID K520Q vs GeForce GT 720M
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 1053 | not rated |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Power efficiency | 2.51 | no data |
Architecture | Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
GPU code name | GK208 | GK104 |
Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
Release date | 25 December 2013 (10 years ago) | 2 July 2014 (10 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $3,599 |
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 cores | 192 | 1536 |
Core clock speed | 719 MHz | 745 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 758 MHz | no data |
Number of transistors | 915 million | 3,540 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 33 Watt | 225 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 12.13 | 95.36 |
Floating-point processing power | 0.2911 TFLOPS | 2.289 TFLOPS |
ROPs | 8 | 32 |
TMUs | 16 | 128 |
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).
Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
Bus support | PCI Express 2.0 | no data |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | no data | 267 mm |
Width | no data | 2-slot |
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 | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
Standard memory configuration | DDR3 | no data |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1250 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 12.8 GB/s | 160.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
eDP 1.2 signal support | Up to 2560x1600 | no data |
LVDS signal support | Up to 1920x1200 | no data |
VGA аnalog display support | Up to 2048x1536 | no data |
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | Up to 2560x1600 | no data |
HDMI | + | - |
HDCP content protection | + | - |
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI | + | - |
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
Blu-Ray 3D Support | + | - |
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | + | - |
Optimus | + | - |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12 API | 12 (11_0) |
Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
Vulkan | 1.1.126 | 1.1.126 |
CUDA | + | 3.0 |
Pros & cons summary
Recency | 25 December 2013 | 2 July 2014 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
Power consumption (TDP) | 33 Watt | 225 Watt |
GT 720M has 581.8% lower power consumption.
GRID K520Q, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 months, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 720M and GRID K520Q. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that GeForce GT 720M is a notebook card while GRID K520Q is a workstation 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.