GRID T4-2Q vs Quadro P620
GRID T4-2Q
Popular choices:
Quadro P620
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 Quadro P620 is on rank 74, so the Quadro P620 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 Quadro P620
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Quadro P620 uses modern memory architecture. The Quadro P620 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GRID T4-2Q lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro P620 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.8% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GRID T4-2Q.
| Insight | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / 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 | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro P620 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $48 versus $600 for the GRID T4-2Q, it costs 92% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 1160.2% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1160.2%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($600) | ✅More affordable ($48) |
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 Quadro P620
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.
Quadro P620
The Quadro P620 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 1 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1177 MHz to 1443 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 40W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,698 points.
Graphics Performance
The GRID T4-2Q scores 3,668 and the Quadro P620 reaches 3,698 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID T4-2Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro P620 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID T4-2Q) vs 512 (Quadro P620). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID T4-2Q) vs 1.478 TFLOPS (Quadro P620). Boost clocks: 1178 MHz vs 1443 MHz.
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,668 | 3,698 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+300% | 512 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.825 TFLOPS+226% | 1.478 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz | 1443 MHz+22% |
| ROPs | 64+300% | 16 |
| TMUs | 128+300% | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 768 KB+300% | 192 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| 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. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID T4-2Q) vs 1 MB (Quadro P620) — the GRID T4-2Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (GRID T4-2Q) vs 12 (FL12_1) (Quadro P620). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12 (FL12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6th Gen (GRID T4-2Q) vs NVENC (Pascal) (Quadro P620). Decoder: NVDEC 4th Gen vs NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9 (GRID T4-2Q) vs H.264,HEVC (Quadro P620).
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6th Gen | NVENC (Pascal) |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th Gen | NVDEC |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9 | H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID T4-2Q draws 225W versus the Quadro P620's 40W — a 139.6% difference. The Quadro P620 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID T4-2Q) vs 350W (Quadro P620). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 168mm vs 145mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70 vs 70°C.
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 40W-82% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 168mm | 145mm |
| Height | 69mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 70 | 70°C |
| Perf/Watt | 16.3 | 92.5+467% |
Value Analysis
The GRID T4-2Q launched at $845 MSRP and currently averages $600, while the Quadro P620 launched at $170 and now averages $48. The Quadro P620 costs 92% less ($552 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 6.1 (GRID T4-2Q) vs 77.0 (Quadro P620) — the Quadro P620 offers 1162.3% better value. The Quadro P620 is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2015).
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $845 | $170-80% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $600 | $48-92% |
| Performance per Dollar | 6.1 | 77.0+1162% |
| Codename | GM204 | GP107 |
| Release | August 30 2015 | February 1 2018 |
| Ranking | #433 | #524 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GRID T4-2Q and Quadro P620
