GRID K260Q vs Quadro NVS 285

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 285 and GRID K260Q, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

NVS 285
2006
128 MB DDR, 18 Watt
0.11

GRID K260Q outperforms NVS 285 by a whopping 6845% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1442523
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.91
Power efficiency0.432.37
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameNV44 A2GK104
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date6 June 2006 (18 years ago)28 June 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$27.99 $937

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 coresno data1536
Core clock speed275 MHz745 MHz
Number of transistors75 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology110 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate1.10095.36
Floating-point processing powerno data2.289 TFLOPS
ROPs232
TMUs4128

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 1.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDRGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount128 MB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed250 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth8 GB/s160.0 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 DMS-59No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 (11_0)
Shader Model3.05.1
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA-3.0

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.

NVS 285 0.11
GRID K260Q 7.64
+6845%

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.

NVS 285 42
GRID K260Q 2949
+6921%

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 0.11 7.64
Recency 6 June 2006 28 June 2013
Maximum RAM amount 128 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 110 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 225 Watt

NVS 285 has 1150% lower power consumption.

GRID K260Q, on the other hand, has a 6845.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.

The GRID K260Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 285 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 NVS 285
Quadro NVS 285
NVIDIA GRID K260Q
GRID K260Q

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 5 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 285 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate GRID K260Q 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.