UHD Graphics 750 vs Quadro K610M

Place in the ranking	914	661
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.21	no data
Power efficiency	4.25	20.56
Architecture	Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)	Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code name	GK208	Rocket Lake GT1
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	23 July 2013 (11 years ago)	30 March 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$229.99	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 cores	192	256
Core clock speed	980 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1300 MHz
Number of transistors	915 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	15.68	20.80
Floating-point processing power	0.3763 TFLOPS	0.6656 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	8
TMUs	16	16

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
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	Ring Bus
Width	no data	IGP

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	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	64 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	650 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	20.8 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	-	no data

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
Display Port	1.2	no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	-
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	+	1.2
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.

Quadro K610M 1.86

UHD Graphics 750 4.50
+142%

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.

Quadro K610M 718

UHD Graphics 750 1733
+141%

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 HD

−118%

24−27
+118%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

20.91

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

−125%

9−10
+125%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −71.4%	12−14 +71.4%
Battlefield 5	1−2 −1000%	10−12 +1000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −300%	27−30 +300%
Hitman 3	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −76.5%	30−33 +76.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 −88.9%	16−18 +88.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −25.7%	40−45 +25.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −71.4%	12−14 +71.4%
Battlefield 5	1−2 −1000%	10−12 +1000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −300%	27−30 +300%
Hitman 3	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −76.5%	30−33 +76.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 −88.9%	16−18 +88.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −41.7%	16−18 +41.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −25.7%	40−45 +25.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −71.4%	12−14 +71.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −300%	27−30 +300%
Hitman 3	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −76.5%	30−33 +76.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 −88.9%	16−18 +88.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −41.7%	16−18 +41.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −25.7%	40−45 +25.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−200%

12−14
+200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Hitman 3	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 −180%	27−30 +180%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

−60%

8−9
+60%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−200%

3−4
+200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	2−3
Far Cry 5	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	1−2

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−66.7%

5−6
+66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

4−5

+0%

4−5

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Hitman 3	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4

3−4

+0%

3−4

+0%

This is how Quadro K610M and UHD Graphics 750 compete in popular games:

UHD Graphics 750 is 118% faster in 1080p

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

in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics 750 is 1000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

UHD Graphics 750 is ahead in 48 tests (80%)
there's a draw in 12 tests (20%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.86	4.50
Recency	23 July 2013	30 March 2021
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	15 Watt

UHD Graphics 750 has a 141.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 750 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K610M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K610M is a mobile workstation card while UHD Graphics 750 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.