GeForce 9800 GX2 vs GRID K160Q
GeForce 9800 GX2
Popular choices:
GRID K160Q
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce 9800 GX2 is positioned at rank 691 and the GRID K160Q is on rank 213, so the GRID K160Q offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9800 GX2
Performance Per Dollar GRID K160Q
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID K160Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.4% higher G3D Mark score and 24900% more VRAM (512 MB vs 2 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 9800 GX2.
| Insight | GeForce 9800 GX2 | GRID K160Q |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / G9x (2007−2010)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+24900%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GRID K160Q offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GRID K160Q holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $75), it costs 60% less, resulting in a 156.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce 9800 GX2 | GRID K160Q |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+156.1%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75) | ✅More affordable ($30) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 9800 GX2 and GRID K160Q
GeForce 9800 GX2
The GeForce 9800 GX2 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 15 2008. It features the G9x architecture. The core clock speed is 500 MHz. It has 224 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 65 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 613 points.
GRID K160Q
The GRID K160Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 28 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 628 points. Launch price was $937.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 9800 GX2 scores 613 and the GRID K160Q reaches 628 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 9800 GX2 is built on G9x while the GRID K160Q uses Kepler, both on 65 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 224 (GeForce 9800 GX2) vs 1,536 (GRID K160Q).
| Feature | GeForce 9800 GX2 | GRID K160Q |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 613 | 628+2% |
| Architecture | G9x | Kepler |
| Process Node | 65 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 224 | 1536+586% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 9800 GX2 | GRID K160Q |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce 9800 GX2 comes with 2 MB of VRAM, while the GRID K160Q has 512 MB. The GRID K160Q offers 24900% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce 9800 GX2 | GRID K160Q |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.002 GB | 0.5 GB+24900% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 9800 GX2 draws 150W versus the GRID K160Q's 225W — a 40% difference. The GeForce 9800 GX2 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 9800 GX2) vs 350W (GRID K160Q). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce 9800 GX2 | GRID K160Q |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W-33% | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 105°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 4.1+46% | 2.8 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 9800 GX2 launched at $599 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the GRID K160Q launched at $125 and now averages $30. The GRID K160Q costs 60% less ($45 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 8.2 (GeForce 9800 GX2) vs 20.9 (GRID K160Q) — the GRID K160Q offers 154.9% better value. The GRID K160Q is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce 9800 GX2 | GRID K160Q |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $599 | $125-79% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75 | $30-60% |
| Performance per Dollar | 8.2 | 20.9+155% |
| Codename | NB9E-GTX | GK104 |
| Release | July 15 2008 | June 28 2013 |
| Ranking | #825 | #589 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 9800 GX2 and GRID K160Q
