Quadro K620M vs GeForce GTX 760

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 760 with Quadro K620M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 760
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 170 Watt
12.41
+311%

GTX 760 outperforms K620M by a whopping 311% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking394765
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.35no data
Power efficiency5.076.99
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGK104GM108
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date25 June 2013 (11 years ago)1 March 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 no data

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 cores1152384
Core clock speed980 MHz1029 MHz
Boost clock speed1033 MHz1124 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)170 Watt30 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature97 °Cno data
Texture fill rate99.0717.98
Floating-point processing power2.378 TFLOPS0.8632 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs9616

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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length241 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Minimum recommended system power500 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.2 GB/s14.4 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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPortNo outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Display Portno data1.2
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Blu Ray 3D+-
3D Gaming+-
3D Vision+-
PhysX+-
Optimus-+
3D Vision Live+-
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.34.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 760 12.41
+311%
Quadro K620M 3.02

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 760 4791
+311%
Quadro K620M 1165

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 760 7962
+227%
Quadro K620M 2434

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 760 29073
+269%
Quadro K620M 7880

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 760 5959
+268%
Quadro K620M 1621

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 760 40150
+342%
Quadro K620M 9092

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 760 14304
+212%
Quadro K620M 4583

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

GTX 760 75
+243%
Quadro K620M 22

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD64
+205%
21
−205%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+383%
6−7
−383%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+325%
8−9
−325%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+413%
16−18
−413%
Hitman 3 21−24
+188%
8−9
−188%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+183%
21−24
−183%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+925%
4−5
−925%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+386%
7−8
−386%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+233%
12−14
−233%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+82.1%
35−40
−82.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+383%
6−7
−383%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+325%
8−9
−325%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+413%
16−18
−413%
Hitman 3 21−24
+188%
8−9
−188%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+183%
21−24
−183%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+925%
4−5
−925%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+386%
7−8
−386%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+233%
12−14
−233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+82.1%
35−40
−82.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+383%
6−7
−383%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+413%
16−18
−413%
Hitman 3 21−24
+188%
8−9
−188%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+183%
21−24
−183%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+233%
12−14
−233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+82.1%
35−40
−82.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+386%
7−8
−386%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+380%
5−6
−380%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+280%
5−6
−280%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+336%
14−16
−336%
Hitman 3 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+213%
8−9
−213%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+333%
18−20
−333%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Hitman 3 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+321%
14−16
−321%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%

This is how GTX 760 and Quadro K620M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 760 is 205% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 760 is 1800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 760 surpassed Quadro K620M in all 62 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.41 3.02
Recency 25 June 2013 1 March 2015
Power consumption (TDP) 170 Watt 30 Watt

GTX 760 has a 310.9% higher aggregate performance score.

Quadro K620M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 466.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 760 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K620M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 760 is a desktop card while Quadro K620M is a mobile 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 GTX 760
GeForce GTX 760
NVIDIA Quadro K620M
Quadro K620M

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.


4 2065 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 760 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 5 votes

Rate Quadro K620M 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.