RTX A400 vs Quadro K620

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K620 and RTX A400, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro K620
2014
2 GB 128-bit, 41 Watt
5.78

RTX A400 outperforms K620 by an impressive 95% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking593417
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.37no data
Power efficiency8.9515.71
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGM107GA107
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date22 July 2014 (10 years ago)16 April 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$189.89 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 cores384768
Core clock speed1058 MHz727 MHz
Boost clock speed1124 MHz1762 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)41 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate26.9842.29
Floating-point processing power0.8632 TFLOPS2.706 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs2424
Tensor Coresno data24
Ray Tracing Coresno data6

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 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length160 mm163 mm
Width1" (2.5 cm)1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 type128 BitGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 29 GB/s96 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 DisplayPort4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
Number of simultaneous displays4no data

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Desktop Management+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA5.08.6

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 K620 5.78
RTX A400 11.27
+95%

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 K620 2231
RTX A400 4346
+94.8%

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.

Quadro K620 6681
RTX A400 22671
+239%

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.78 11.27
Recency 22 July 2014 16 April 2024
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 41 Watt 50 Watt

Quadro K620 has 22% lower power consumption.

RTX A400, on the other hand, has a 95% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K620 in performance tests.


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 Quadro K620
Quadro K620
NVIDIA RTX A400
RTX A400

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.


3.7 604 votes

Rate Quadro K620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 12 votes

Rate RTX A400 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.