Quadro M620 vs Quadro K4100M

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.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro K4100M

#23

Intel Arc Pro B60

MSRP: $500|Avg: $450

100%

#24

Radeon PRO W7600

MSRP: $599|Avg: $599

99%

#25

RTX 2000 Ada Generation

MSRP: $625|Avg: $750

99%

#26

Radeon Pro Vega 48

MSRP: $450|Avg: $450

90%

#27

Radeon Pro 5700 XT

MSRP: $500|Avg: $280

90%

#28

Quadro P5200

MSRP: $500|Avg: $240

84%

#29

Radeon PRO W7700

MSRP: $999|Avg: $999

83%

#37

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

533%

#52

Quadro K4100M

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $261

100%

#58

Quadro K2000M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30

91%

#60

Intel Arc Pro A60

MSRP: $380|Avg: $380

90%

#63

T400 4GB

MSRP: $159|Avg: $99

86%

#64

Radeon Pro 5300

MSRP: $300|Avg: $150

86%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro K4100M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.5% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro M620.

Insight	Quadro M620	Quadro K4100M
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.5%)	✅Leading raw performance (+0.5%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Maxwell (2014−2017))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

The Quadro M620 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro M620 holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $261), it costs 85% less, resulting in a 549% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Quadro M620	Quadro K4100M
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+549%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($40)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($261)

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.

Quadro M620 Benchmark Check

Quadro K4100M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Quadro M620 and Quadro K4100M

Quadro M620

The Quadro M620 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 11 2017. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 756 MHz to 977 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,758 points.

Quadro K4100M

The Quadro K4100M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 706 MHz. It has 1152 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,773 points. Launch price was $1,499.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro M620 scores 2,758 and the Quadro K4100M reaches 2,773 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M620 is built on Maxwell while the Quadro K4100M uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 512 (Quadro M620) vs 1,152 (Quadro K4100M). Raw compute: 1 TFLOPS (Quadro M620) vs 1.627 TFLOPS (Quadro K4100M).

Feature	Quadro M620	Quadro K4100M
G3D Mark Score	2,758	2,773
Architecture	Maxwell	Kepler
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	512	1152+125%
Compute (TFLOPS)	1 TFLOPS	1.627 TFLOPS+63%
ROPs	16	32+100%
TMUs	32	96+200%
L1 Cache	256 KB+167%	96 KB
L2 Cache	2 MB+300%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro M620	Quadro K4100M
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 Quadro M620 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro K4100M has 4 GB. The Quadro K4100M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Quadro M620) vs 0.5 MB (Quadro K4100M) — the Quadro M620 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro M620	Quadro K4100M
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	4 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	2 MB+300%	0.5 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro M620 draws 30W versus the Quadro K4100M's 100W — a 107.7% difference. The Quadro M620 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M620) vs 350W (Quadro K4100M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	Quadro M620	Quadro K4100M
TDP	30W-70%	100W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	1mm	—
Slots	0	—
Perf/Watt	91.9+232%	27.7

💰

Value Analysis

The Quadro M620 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the Quadro K4100M launched at $1499 and now averages $261. The Quadro M620 costs 84.7% less ($221 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 69.0 (Quadro M620) vs 10.6 (Quadro K4100M) — the Quadro M620 offers 550.9% better value. The Quadro M620 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2013).