GRID P40-8Q vs T1000
GRID P40-8Q
Popular choices:
T1000
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 P40-8Q is positioned at rank 265 and the T1000 is on rank 73, so the T1000 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID P40-8Q
Performance Per Dollar T1000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The T1000 is significantly newer (2021 vs 2015). The T1000 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GRID P40-8Q lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The T1000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GRID P40-8Q.
| Insight | GRID P40-8Q | T1000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GRID P40-8Q offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $150 versus $382 for the T1000, it costs 61% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 149.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID P40-8Q | T1000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+149.9%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($150) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($382) |
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 P40-8Q and T1000
GRID P40-8Q
The GRID P40-8Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 557 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,507 points.
T1000
The T1000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 6 2021. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1065 MHz to 1395 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,649 points.
Graphics Performance
The GRID P40-8Q scores 7,507 and the T1000 reaches 7,649 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID P40-8Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the T1000 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID P40-8Q) vs 896 (T1000). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID P40-8Q) vs 2.5 TFLOPS (T1000). Boost clocks: 1178 MHz vs 1395 MHz.
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | T1000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,507 | 7,649+2% |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+129% | 896 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.825 TFLOPS+93% | 2.5 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz | 1395 MHz+18% |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 128+129% | 56 |
| L1 Cache | 768 KB | 896 KB+17% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | T1000 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 4 GB of GDDR6. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID P40-8Q) vs 1 MB (T1000) — the GRID P40-8Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | T1000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.0 (GRID P40-8Q) vs 12.1 (T1000). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | T1000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.2+9% |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 0 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 4.0 (GRID P40-8Q) vs NVENC 7.0 (T1000). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP7 vs PureVideo HD VP9. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GRID P40-8Q) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (T1000).
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | T1000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 4.0 | NVENC 7.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP7 | PureVideo HD VP9 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID P40-8Q draws 225W versus the T1000's 50W — a 127.3% difference. The T1000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID P40-8Q) vs 350W (T1000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 156mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | T1000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 50W-78% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | 156mm |
| Height | 111mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | — | 70°C |
| Perf/Watt | 33.4 | 153.0+358% |
Value Analysis
The GRID P40-8Q launched at $3000 MSRP and currently averages $150, while the T1000 launched at $350 and now averages $382. The GRID P40-8Q costs 60.7% less ($232 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 50.0 (GRID P40-8Q) vs 20.0 (T1000) — the GRID P40-8Q offers 150% better value. The T1000 is the newer GPU (2021 vs 2015).
| Feature | GRID P40-8Q | T1000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $3000 | $350-88% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150-61% | $382 |
| Performance per Dollar | 50.0+150% | 20.0 |
| Codename | GM204 | TU117 |
| Release | August 30 2015 | May 6 2021 |
| Ranking | #505 | #333 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GRID P40-8Q and T1000
