GRID M6-8Q vs P104-100
GRID M6-8Q
Popular choices:
P104-100
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. The GRID M6-8Q is positioned at rank #273 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID M6-8Q
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The P104-100 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GRID M6-8Q.
| Insight | GRID M6-8Q | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The P104-100 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the P104-100 holds the technical lead. Priced at $10 (vs $100), it costs 90% less, resulting in a 930.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID M6-8Q | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+930.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($100) | ✅More affordable ($10) |
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 M6-8Q and P104-100
GRID M6-8Q
The GRID M6-8Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 722 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,568 points.
P104-100
The P104-100 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 12 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1607 MHz to 1733 MHz. It has 1920 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,678 points.
Graphics Performance
The GRID M6-8Q scores 3,568 and the P104-100 reaches 3,678 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID M6-8Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the P104-100 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (GRID M6-8Q) vs 1,920 (P104-100). Raw compute: 2.218 TFLOPS (GRID M6-8Q) vs 6.655 TFLOPS (P104-100).
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,568 | 3,678+3% |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536 | 1920+25% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.218 TFLOPS | 6.655 TFLOPS+200% |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 96 | 120+25% |
| L1 Cache | 576 KB | 720 KB+25% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID M6-8Q draws 100W versus the P104-100's 30W — a 107.7% difference. The P104-100 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID M6-8Q) vs 350W (P104-100). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 30W-70% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 1mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 35.7 | 122.6+243% |
Value Analysis
The GRID M6-8Q launched at $1500 MSRP and currently averages $100, while the P104-100 launched at $0 and now averages $10. The P104-100 costs 90% less ($90 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 35.7 (GRID M6-8Q) vs 367.8 (P104-100) — the P104-100 offers 930.3% better value. The P104-100 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2015).
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1500 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $100 | $10-90% |
| Performance per Dollar | 35.7 | 367.8+930% |
| Codename | GM204 | GP104 |
| Release | August 30 2015 | December 12 2017 |
| Ranking | #535 | #529 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GRID M6-8Q and P104-100
