Quadro K620 vs Radeon R9 280

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 with Quadro K620, including specs and performance data.

R9 280
2014
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
14.40
+149%

R9 280 outperforms K620 by a whopping 149% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking364593
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.262.37
Power efficiency5.028.95
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameTahitiGM107
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (10 years ago)22 July 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 $189.89

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 280 has 122% better value for money than Quadro K620.

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 cores1792384
Core clock speedno data1058 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHz1124 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt41 Watt
Texture fill rate104.526.98
Floating-point processing power3.344 TFLOPS0.8632 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs11224

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length275 mm160 mm
Width2-slot1" (2.5 cm)
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5128 Bit
Maximum RAM amount3 GB2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth240 GB/sUp 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displaysno data4
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Desktop Managementno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+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.

R9 280 14.40
+149%
Quadro K620 5.78

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.

R9 280 5554
+149%
Quadro K620 2231

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 14.40 5.78
Recency 4 March 2014 22 July 2014
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 41 Watt

R9 280 has a 149.1% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Quadro K620, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 months, and 387.8% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K620 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 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.

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 R9 280
Radeon R9 280
NVIDIA Quadro K620
Quadro K620

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.


3.6 385 votes

Rate Radeon R9 280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 604 votes

Rate Quadro K620 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.