Quadro K2100M vs Radeon HD 8790M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8790M with Quadro K2100M, including specs and performance data.

HD 8790M
2013
2 GB GDDR5
3.39

K2100M outperforms HD 8790M by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking733725
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.63
Power efficiencyno data4.40
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameMarsGK106
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date1 April 2013 (11 years ago)23 July 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$84.95

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 cores384576
Core clock speed850 MHz667 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHzno data
Number of transistors950 million2,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown55 Watt
Texture fill rate21.6032.02
Floating-point processing power0.6912 TFLOPS0.7684 TFLOPS
ROPs816
TMUs2448

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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedmedium sized
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)MXM-A (3.0)
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz752 MHz
Memory bandwidth64 GB/s48.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
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.

HD 8790M 3.39
K2100M 3.53
+4.1%

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 8790M 1305
K2100M 1360
+4.2%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD 8790M 2187
K2100M 2394
+9.5%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

HD 8790M 9835
K2100M 10648
+8.3%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 8790M 1727
+7.5%
K2100M 1606

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

HD 8790M 12049
+1.8%
K2100M 11835

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 HD27
+17.4%
23
−17.4%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.69

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−5.3%
20−22
+5.3%
Hitman 3 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−4.2%
24−27
+4.2%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−2.5%
40−45
+2.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−5.3%
20−22
+5.3%
Hitman 3 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−4.2%
24−27
+4.2%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−66.7%
25
+66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−2.5%
40−45
+2.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−5.3%
20−22
+5.3%
Hitman 3 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−4.2%
24−27
+4.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−2.5%
40−45
+2.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 1−2
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
−4.8%
21−24
+4.8%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how HD 8790M and K2100M compete in popular games:

  • HD 8790M is 17% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the K2100M is 67% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • K2100M is ahead in 27 tests (44%)
  • there's a draw in 35 tests (56%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.39 3.53
Recency 1 April 2013 23 July 2013

K2100M has a 4.1% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 3 months.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon HD 8790M and Quadro K2100M.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8790M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K2100M is a mobile workstation one.


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.


AMD Radeon HD 8790M
Radeon HD 8790M
NVIDIA Quadro K2100M
Quadro K2100M

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.


3.3 337 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8790M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 280 votes

Rate Quadro K2100M 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.