CPU
GPU
T400
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 T400 is positioned at rank 80 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 T400
Performance Per Dollar Quadro P620
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro P620 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.5% higher G3D Mark score. However, the T400 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | T400 | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.5%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro P620 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $48 versus $179 for the T400, it costs 73% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 282.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | T400 | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+282.1%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($179) | ✅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 T400 and Quadro P620
T400
The T400 is manufactured by an unknown manufacturer. It was released in May 6 2021. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 420 MHz to 1425 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,609 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 T400 scores 3,609 and the Quadro P620 reaches 3,698 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The T400 is built on Turing while the Quadro P620 uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 384 (T400) vs 512 (Quadro P620). Raw compute: 1.094 TFLOPS (T400) vs 1.478 TFLOPS (Quadro P620). Boost clocks: 1425 MHz vs 1443 MHz.
| Feature | T400 | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,609 | 3,698+2% |
| Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 512+33% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.094 TFLOPS | 1.478 TFLOPS+35% |
| Boost Clock | 1425 MHz | 1443 MHz+1% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 24 | 32+33% |
| L1 Cache | 384 KB+100% | 192 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | T400 | 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)
The T400 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro P620 has 2 GB. The T400 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | T400 | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The T400 draws 30W versus the Quadro P620's 40W — a 28.6% difference. The T400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (T400) vs 350W (Quadro P620). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | T400 | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W-25% | 40W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 145mm |
| Height | — | 69mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 70°C |
| Perf/Watt | 120.3+30% | 92.5 |
Value Analysis
The T400 launched at $180 MSRP and currently averages $179, while the Quadro P620 launched at $170 and now averages $48. The Quadro P620 costs 73.2% less ($131 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 20.2 (T400) vs 77.0 (Quadro P620) — the Quadro P620 offers 281.2% better value. The T400 is the newer GPU (2021 vs 2018).
| Feature | T400 | Quadro P620 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $180 | $170-6% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $179 | $48-73% |
| Performance per Dollar | 20.2 | 77.0+281% |
| Codename | TU117 | GP107 |
| Release | May 6 2021 | February 1 2018 |
| Ranking | #532 | #524 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on T400 and Quadro P620
