Quadro K620 vs Radeon HD 6790

Place in the ranking	678	590
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.76	2.37
Power efficiency	1.93	8.90
Architecture	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)	Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code name	Barts	GM107
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	4 April 2011 (13 years ago)	22 July 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$149	$189.89

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro K620 has 212% better value for money than HD 6790.

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	800	384
Core clock speed	840 MHz	1058 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1124 MHz
Number of transistors	1,700 million	1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	41 Watt
Texture fill rate	33.60	26.98
Floating-point processing power	1.344 TFLOPS	0.8632 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	40	24

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	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	198 mm	160 mm
Width	2-slot	1" (2.5 cm)
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	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	GDDR5	128 Bit
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1050 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	134.4 GB/s	Up to 29 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 Connectors	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displays	no data	4
HDMI	+	-

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.

DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	12
Shader Model	5.0	5.1
OpenGL	4.4	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.1.126
CUDA	-	5.0

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.

HD 6790 4.19

Quadro K620 5.78
+37.9%

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.

HD 6790 1618

Quadro K620 2231
+37.9%

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:

900p	52 −34.6%	70−75 +34.6%
Full HD	58 −37.9%	80−85 +37.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

2.57

2.37

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

7−8

−28.6%

9−10
+28.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Battlefield 5	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −20%	30−33 +20%
Hitman 3	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −25%	35−40 +25%
Metro Exodus	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −31.3%	21−24 +31.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −27.9%	55−60 +27.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Battlefield 5	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −20%	30−33 +20%
Hitman 3	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −25%	35−40 +25%
Metro Exodus	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −31.3%	21−24 +31.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −31.3%	21−24 +31.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −27.9%	55−60 +27.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −20%	30−33 +20%
Hitman 3	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −25%	35−40 +25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −31.3%	21−24 +31.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −31.3%	21−24 +31.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −27.9%	55−60 +27.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12

−27.3%

14−16
+27.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Hitman 3	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 −34.6%	35−40 +34.6%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
−25%

10−11

+25%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Hitman 3	0−1	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

−20%

6−7
+20%

This is how HD 6790 and Quadro K620 compete in popular games:

Quadro K620 is 35% faster in 900p
Quadro K620 is 38% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.19	5.78
Recency	4 April 2011	22 July 2014
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	41 Watt

Quadro K620 has a 37.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 265.9% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K620 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6790 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6790 is a desktop card while Quadro K620 is a workstation one.

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