NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2100M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly in favor of the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M. Across the only directly comparable test, GeekBench OpenCL, the Quadro K2100M records a score of 4587 against 3594 for the GeForce GT 545, a 27.6% advantage. This makes the K2100M the clear winner in raw compute throughput, which is the primary workload for the professional segment it targets.

The Quadro K2100M also holds a broader benchmark portfolio in the database. It has recorded scores across three different APIs: GeekBench Metal at 3524, GeekBench OpenCL at 4587, and GeekBench Vulkan at 4343. This breadth indicates that the K2100M maintains consistent performance across multiple compute and graphics interfaces. Its average benchmark score of 4151 reflects this multi-test stability. By contrast, the GeForce GT 545 has only one recorded benchmark result, GeekBench OpenCL at 3594, which also serves as its average score.

The GeForce GT 545 does not win any of the recorded head-to-head comparisons. Its sole advantage in the database is structural rather than performance-based: it is a desktop card with a single-slot form factor and a PCIe 2.0 x16 bus interface, whereas the K2100M is an MXM module designed for portable devices. In terms of measured compute performance, the data shows no scenario where the GT 545 outperforms the K2100M.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA architecture generations. The Quadro K2100M uses the GK106S chip built on the Kepler architecture, produced on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The GeForce GT 545 uses the GF116 chip based on the older Fermi 2.0 architecture, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 40 nm process. This process node difference has a direct impact on transistor density: the K2100M packs 2,540 million transistors into a 221 mm² die, yielding 11.5 million transistors per square millimeter, while the GT 545 contains 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die, for a density of 4.9 million per square millimeter.

The compute resources differ substantially. The Quadro K2100M features 576 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The GeForce GT 545 has 144 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The K2100M therefore has four times the shader count and double the texture units of the GT 545, which explains its significant lead in floating-point and texture throughput.

Memory architecture also diverges. The K2100M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 48.13 GB/s of bandwidth. The GT 545 uses 1536 MB of DDR3 on a wider 192-bit bus, but its bandwidth is lower at 38.40 GB/s. The GDDR5 memory type on the K2100M compensates for the narrower bus and still provides higher effective bandwidth. Memory clocks reflect this: the K2100M runs at 752 MHz with 3 Gbps effective, while the GT 545 runs at 800 MHz with 1600 Mbps effective.

API support shows a similar split. Both cards support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. However, the K2100M adds Vulkan 1.2.175 support, while the GT 545 has no recorded Vulkan capability. This makes the K2100M more future-proof for modern compute workloads that leverage Vulkan.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct comparison between these two cards: the GeekBench OpenCL test. In this test, the Quadro K2100M scores 4587 against the GeForce GT 545's 3594. The delta is 27.6% in favor of the K2100M. This is a substantial margin, indicating that the K2100M delivers well over a quarter more compute throughput in OpenCL workloads.

To contextualize the K2100M's result, its OpenCL score of 4587 sits above its own average of 4151, meaning the card performs slightly better in OpenCL than in its other recorded tests. The GT 545's OpenCL score of 3594 is its only recorded metric, so it cannot be compared against other APIs for that card. The gap between the two cards is not marginal; 27.6% represents a meaningful generational and architectural leap, consistent with the K2100M's newer Kepler design, higher shader count, and faster GDDR5 memory.

The percentile rankings reinforce this. The K2100M sits at the 25th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the GT 545 sits at the 21st percentile. Although both are below the median, the K2100M's rank is higher, and its average score of 4151 places it in proximity to much more modern parts. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti with an average score of 4193, a 1% delta, and the AMD Radeon R5 M330 at 4170, a 0.4% delta. The GT 545's nearest rivals are notably different, including the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation at 3596, a 0.1% delta, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 at 3629, a 1% delta. The K2100M competes with a higher tier of hardware.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards. The Quadro K2100M uses the GK106S chip, while the GT 545 uses GF116. The K2100M is built on Kepler architecture, the GT 545 on Fermi 2.0. The process nodes are 28 nm versus 40 nm. Transistor counts are 2,540 million versus 1,170 million. Die sizes are 221 mm² versus 238 mm², and transistor densities are 11.5M per mm² versus 4.9M per mm².

Base and boost clocks are recorded only for the K2100M, both at 667 MHz, while the GT 545 has no recorded base or boost clock. Memory clocks are 752 MHz with 3 Gbps effective for the K2100M, versus 800 MHz with 1600 Mbps effective for the GT 545. Memory sizes are 2 GB versus 1536 MB, with GDDR5 versus DDR3 types. Bus widths are 128-bit versus 192-bit. Bandwidth is 48.13 GB/s versus 38.40 GB/s.

Shading units are 576 versus 144. TMUs are 48 versus 24. ROPs are identical at 16. Pixel rates are 8.004 GPixel/s versus 4.320 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 32.02 GTexel/s versus 17.28 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 768.4 GFLOPS versus 414.7 GFLOPS.

TDP is 55 W for the K2100M versus 70 W for the GT 545. The K2100M is an MXM module, while the GT 545 is single-slot. Power connectors are none for both. The GT 545 lists a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the K2100M has none listed. Bus interfaces are MXM-A (3.0) versus PCIe 2.0 x16. Display outputs are portable-device-dependent for the K2100M versus 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, 1x VGA for the GT 545.

Vulkan support is present on the K2100M at version 1.2.175, while the GT 545 has no Vulkan support. Release dates are 2013-07-22 for the K2100M versus 2011-05-13 for the GT 545. The GT 545 has a launch MSRP of 149 USD. The K2100M has no launch MSRP recorded. The GT 545 has a physical length of 145 mm or 5.7 inches, while the K2100M has no recorded dimensions.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in compute benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M. In the GeekBench OpenCL test, it scores 4587 versus 3594 for the GeForce GT 545, a 27.6% advantage.

Q: Do these cards support the same APIs?

A: No. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the Quadro K2100M also supports Vulkan 1.2.175, while the GeForce GT 545 has no recorded Vulkan support.

Q: How do their memory systems compare?

A: The Quadro K2100M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 48.13 GB/s bandwidth. The GeForce GT 545 has 1536 MB of DDR3 on a 192-bit bus with 38.40 GB/s bandwidth. Despite the narrower bus, the K2100M delivers higher bandwidth.

Q: What are their form factors?

A: The Quadro K2100M is an MXM module designed for portable devices. The GeForce GT 545 is a single-slot desktop card with a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface and a 145 mm length.

Q: Which card has higher power consumption?

A: The GeForce GT 545 has a TDP of 70 W, while the Quadro K2100M has a TDP of 55 W. The GT 545 also lists a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: How do their transistor counts and process nodes differ?

A: The Quadro K2100M uses 2,540 million transistors on a 28 nm process with a 221 mm² die. The GeForce GT 545 uses 1,170 million transistors on a 40 nm process with a 238 mm² die.