
GRID T4-2Q
Popular choices:

GRID M6-8Q
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 T4-2Q is positioned at rank 231 and the GRID M6-8Q is on rank 273, so the GRID T4-2Q offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID T4-2Q
Performance Per Dollar GRID M6-8Q
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID T4-2Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.8% 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 T4-2Q | GRID M6-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.8%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| 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 | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GRID M6-8Q offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GRID M6-8Q holds the technical lead. Priced at $100 (vs $600), it costs 83% less, resulting in a 483.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID T4-2Q | GRID M6-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+483.6%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($600) | ✅More affordable ($100) |
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 T4-2Q and GRID M6-8Q

GRID T4-2Q
The GRID T4-2Q 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: 3,668 points.

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.
Graphics Performance
The GRID T4-2Q scores 3,668 and the GRID M6-8Q reaches 3,568 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID T4-2Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GRID M6-8Q uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID T4-2Q) vs 1,536 (GRID M6-8Q). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID T4-2Q) vs 2.218 TFLOPS (GRID M6-8Q).
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | GRID M6-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,668+3% | 3,568 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+33% | 1536 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.825 TFLOPS+118% | 2.218 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 128+33% | 96 |
| L1 Cache | 768 KB+33% | 576 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | GRID M6-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| 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 T4-2Q | GRID M6-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (GRID T4-2Q) vs 12_1 (GRID M6-8Q). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 0.
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | GRID M6-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12_1 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 0 |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID T4-2Q draws 225W versus the GRID M6-8Q's 100W — a 76.9% difference. The GRID M6-8Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID T4-2Q) vs 350W (GRID M6-8Q). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 168mm vs 1mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | GRID M6-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 100W-56% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 168mm | 1mm |
| Height | 69mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 16.3 | 35.7+119% |
Value Analysis
The GRID T4-2Q launched at $845 MSRP and currently averages $600, while the GRID M6-8Q launched at $1500 and now averages $100. The GRID M6-8Q costs 83.3% less ($500 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 6.1 (GRID T4-2Q) vs 35.7 (GRID M6-8Q) — the GRID M6-8Q offers 485.2% better value.
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | GRID M6-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $845-44% | $1500 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $600 | $100-83% |
| Performance per Dollar | 6.1 | 35.7+485% |
| Codename | GM204 | GM204 |
| Release | August 30 2015 | August 30 2015 |
| Ranking | #433 | #535 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















