
GeForce GT 340 vs Quadro K600

GeForce GT 340
Popular choices:

Quadro K600
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 GT 340 is positioned at rank 170 and the Quadro K600 is on rank 240, so the GeForce GT 340 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT 340
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K600
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GT 340 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro K600.
| Insight | GeForce GT 340 | Quadro K600 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GT 340 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GT 340 holds the technical lead. Priced at $20 (vs $20), it costs 0% less, resulting in a 2.2% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GT 340 | Quadro K600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+2.2%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 GT 340 and Quadro K600

GeForce GT 340
The GeForce GT 340 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 29 2014. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 993 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 64W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 738 points. Launch price was $89.

Quadro K600
The Quadro K600 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 797 MHz to 902 MHz. It has 2880 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 722 points. Launch price was $5,265.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GT 340 scores 738 and the Quadro K600 reaches 722 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GT 340 is built on Kepler while the Quadro K600 uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GT 340) vs 2,880 (Quadro K600). Raw compute: 0.7626 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 340) vs 5.196 TFLOPS (Quadro K600).
| Feature | GeForce GT 340 | Quadro K600 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 738+2% | 722 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 2880+650% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7626 TFLOPS | 5.196 TFLOPS+581% |
| ROPs | 16 | 48+200% |
| TMUs | 32 | 240+650% |
| L1 Cache | 32 KB | 240 KB+650% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1.5 MB+500% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GT 340 | Quadro K600 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 1 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (GeForce GT 340) vs 1.5 MB (Quadro K600) — the Quadro K600 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GT 340 | Quadro K600 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1.5 MB+500% |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GT 340 draws 64W versus the Quadro K600's 225W — a 111.4% difference. The GeForce GT 340 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GT 340) vs 350W (Quadro K600). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce GT 340 | Quadro K600 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 64W-72% | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 168mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 11.5+259% | 3.2 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GT 340 launched at $100 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the Quadro K600 launched at $199 and now averages $20. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 36.9 (GeForce GT 340) vs 36.1 (Quadro K600) — the GeForce GT 340 offers 2.2% better value. The GeForce GT 340 is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2013).
| Feature | GeForce GT 340 | Quadro K600 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-50% | $199 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20 | $20 |
| Performance per Dollar | 36.9+2% | 36.1 |
| Codename | GK107 | GK110B |
| Release | May 29 2014 | July 23 2013 |
| Ranking | #777 | #318 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.











