Radeon Pro 5300 vs Quadro K620M

Place in the ranking	771	295
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	7.02	15.19
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code name	GM108	Navi 14
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	1 March 2015 (9 years ago)	4 August 2020 (4 years ago)

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	384	1280
Core clock speed	1029 MHz	1000 MHz
Boost clock speed	1124 MHz	1650 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	85 Watt
Texture fill rate	17.98	132.0
Floating-point processing power	0.8632 TFLOPS	4.224 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	32
TMUs	16	80

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).

Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x8
Width	no data	IGP
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14.4 GB/s	224.0 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
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	+	-
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	6.5
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	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 K620M 3.02

Pro 5300 18.52
+513%

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 K620M 1165

Pro 5300 7143
+513%

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

−471%

120−130
+471%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7
−483%

35−40

+483%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −511%	55−60 +511%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Battlefield 5	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 −471%	40−45 +471%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 −463%	45−50 +463%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −494%	95−100 +494%
Hitman 3	8−9 −463%	45−50 +463%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −509%	140−150 +509%
Metro Exodus	4−5 −500%	24−27 +500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 −471%	40−45 +471%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −483%	70−75 +483%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −490%	230−240 +490%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −511%	55−60 +511%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Battlefield 5	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 −471%	40−45 +471%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 −463%	45−50 +463%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −494%	95−100 +494%
Hitman 3	8−9 −463%	45−50 +463%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −509%	140−150 +509%
Metro Exodus	4−5 −500%	24−27 +500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 −471%	40−45 +471%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −483%	70−75 +483%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −507%	85−90 +507%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −490%	230−240 +490%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −511%	55−60 +511%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 −471%	40−45 +471%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −494%	95−100 +494%
Hitman 3	8−9 −463%	45−50 +463%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −509%	140−150 +509%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −483%	70−75 +483%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −507%	85−90 +507%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −490%	230−240 +490%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
−471%

40−45

+471%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Hitman 3	8−9 −463%	45−50 +463%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −463%	45−50 +463%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 −511%	110−120 +511%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
−483%

35−40

+483%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
−500%

24−27

+500%

This is how Quadro K620M and Pro 5300 compete in popular games:

Pro 5300 is 471% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.02	18.52
Recency	1 March 2015	4 August 2020
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	85 Watt

Quadro K620M has 183.3% lower power consumption.

Pro 5300, on the other hand, has a 513.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro 5300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K620M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K620M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon Pro 5300 is a workstation one.

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