GRID K260Q vs Quadro M1000M
GRID K260Q
Popular choices:
Quadro M1000M
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 GRID K260Q is positioned at rank 247 and the Quadro M1000M is on rank 49, so the Quadro M1000M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID K260Q
Performance Per Dollar Quadro M1000M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID K260Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.7% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro M1000M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GRID K260Q | Quadro M1000M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GRID K260Q remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 GRID K260Q and Quadro M1000M
GRID K260Q
The GRID K260Q 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: 2,949 points. Launch price was $937.
Quadro M1000M
The Quadro M1000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 18 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 993 MHz to 1072 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 40W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,845 points. Launch price was $200.89.
Graphics Performance
The GRID K260Q scores 2,949 and the Quadro M1000M reaches 2,845 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID K260Q is built on Kepler while the Quadro M1000M uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,536 (GRID K260Q) vs 512 (Quadro M1000M). Raw compute: 2.289 TFLOPS (GRID K260Q) vs 1.017 TFLOPS (Quadro M1000M).
| Feature | GRID K260Q | Quadro M1000M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,949+4% | 2,845 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536+200% | 512 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.289 TFLOPS+125% | 1.017 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 128+300% | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 256 KB+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 2 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID K260Q | Quadro M1000M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 GRID K260Q comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M1000M has 4 GB. The Quadro M1000M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (GRID K260Q) vs 2 MB (Quadro M1000M) — the Quadro M1000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID K260Q | Quadro M1000M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 2 MB+300% |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID K260Q draws 225W versus the Quadro M1000M's 40W — a 139.6% difference. The Quadro M1000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID K260Q) vs 350W (Quadro M1000M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GRID K260Q | Quadro M1000M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 40W-82% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Perf/Watt | 13.1 | 71.1+443% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro M1000M is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2013).
| Feature | GRID K260Q | Quadro M1000M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $937 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | — |
| Codename | GK104 | GM107 |
| Release | June 28 2013 | August 18 2015 |
| Ranking | #589 | #594 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GRID K260Q and Quadro M1000M
