GRID K240Q vs Quadro NVS 290

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 290 and GRID K240Q, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

NVS 290
2007
256 MB DDR2, 21 Watt
0.59

GRID K240Q outperforms NVS 290 by a whopping 1017% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1202565
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.031.36
Power efficiency1.962.04
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameG86GK104
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date4 October 2007 (17 years ago)28 June 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 $469

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GRID K240Q has 4433% better value for money than NVS 290.

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 cores161536
Core clock speed459 MHz745 MHz
Number of transistors210 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)21 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate3.67295.36
Floating-point processing power0.02938 TFLOPS2.289 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs8128

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 typeDDR2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount256 MB1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed400 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth6.4 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.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA1.13.0

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 290 0.59
GRID K240Q 6.59
+1017%

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 290 228
GRID K240Q 2541
+1014%

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 0.59 6.59
Recency 4 October 2007 28 June 2013
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 80 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 21 Watt 225 Watt

NVS 290 has 971.4% lower power consumption.

GRID K240Q, on the other hand, has a 1016.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

The GRID K240Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 290 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 290
Quadro NVS 290
NVIDIA GRID K240Q
GRID K240Q

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.


3.4 21 vote

Rate Quadro NVS 290 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate GRID K240Q 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.