NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2100M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one directly comparable benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 scores 4893 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M scores 4587 points. This gives the GTS 450 a 6.7% advantage, making it the winner in the only head-to-head measurement recorded. The delta is modest but consistent: the older Fermi-based card outperforms the newer Kepler-based mobile workstation part in raw OpenCL compute throughput.

Looking at the wider benchmark context, the GTS 450 sits at the 28th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Quadro K2100M lands at the 25th percentile. That three-percentile gap aligns with the 6.7% OpenCL lead. The GTS 450’s average benchmark score is 4893, which is exactly its OpenCL result, since that is its only recorded test. The K2100M has three recorded benchmarks: OpenCL at 4587, Vulkan at 4343, and Metal at 3524. Its average across all tests is 4151, dragged down substantially by the Metal score, which is over 20% lower than its OpenCL result.

The rival data further contextualizes these scores. The GTS 450’s nearest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB, which averages 4901, a mere 0.2% higher. The AMD FirePro W5130M scores 4904, also 0.2% above. The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX trails by 0.5%, and the AMD Radeon R7 M265 leads by 0.7%. For the K2100M, the nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R5 M330 at 4170, which is 0.4% ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti sits 1% higher at 4193, while the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB is 1.4% behind at 4093, and the Intel HD Graphics 630 is 1.9% behind at 4075. These narrow deltas indicate both cards sit in a tightly packed performance tier, where small differences separate neighbors.

The single head-to-head test is the only direct measurement, but the percentile data and rival comparisons reinforce the same conclusion: the GTS 450 holds a measurable, though not overwhelming, compute advantage over the K2100M in OpenCL workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and process nodes. The GTS 450 uses the GF106 chip built on Fermi architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 40 nm process. It packs 1,170 million transistors into a 238 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 4.9 million per square millimeter. The K2100M uses the GK106S chip on Kepler architecture, also from TSMC but on a more advanced 28 nm process. It contains 2,540 million transistors in a 221 mm² die, giving a density of 11.5 million per square millimeter. The K2100M more than doubles the transistor count while using a slightly smaller die, a direct result of the denser manufacturing process.

Shader hardware shows a significant difference in scale. The K2100M has 576 shading units, triple the GTS 450’s 192. Texture mapping units also favor the K2100M: 48 versus 32. Both cards have 16 render output units, so pixel throughput is governed by clock speed. The GTS 450 achieves a pixel rate of 6.264 GPixel/s, while the K2100M reaches 8.004 GPixel/s. Texture rate similarly favors the K2100M at 32.02 GTexel/s versus 25.06 GTexel/s. Despite having far fewer shading units, the GTS 450’s higher clock speeds (its memory runs at 902 MHz, or 3.6 Gbps effective, versus the K2100M’s 752 MHz, or 3 Gbps effective) close some of the gap in raw fill rates.

Memory subsystems differ in capacity but not bus width. Both use GDDR5 on a 128-bit interface. The GTS 450 has 1024 MB, while the K2100M has 2 GB. Bandwidth favors the GTS 450: 57.73 GB/s versus 48.13 GB/s, because its memory clock is higher despite the same bus width. The K2100M’s base and boost clocks are both locked at 667 MHz, while the GTS 450’s core clock is not listed in the database, so only memory clocks can be compared directly.

Compute throughput in FP32 also tells a nuanced story. The K2100M delivers 768.4 GFLOPS, while the GTS 450 delivers 601.3 GFLOPS. The K2100M’s higher shading unit count and higher pixel/texture rates give it the theoretical compute edge, even though the GTS 450 wins in the actual OpenCL benchmark. Neither card lists FP16 capability.

Power and physical design differ substantially. The GTS 450 has a TDP of 106 W, uses a dual-slot cooler, requires a single 6-pin power connector, and suggests a 300 W power supply. It measures 210 mm in length and 111 mm in height. The K2100M is an MXM module with no power connectors, a 55 W TDP, and no listed dimensions. Its display outputs are listed as “Portable Device Dependent,” reflecting its mobile workstation role, while the GTS 450 offers 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a. The K2100M uses an MXM-A (3.0) bus interface, while the GTS 450 uses PCIe 2.0 x16.

API support shows a generational difference. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The K2100M additionally lists Vulkan 1.2.175 support, while the GTS 450 has no Vulkan entry. This is consistent with the K2100M’s newer architecture and driver maturity.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear but narrow outcome. The GeForce GTS 450 wins the only direct comparison, beating the Quadro K2100M by 6.7% in Geekbench OpenCL. It also holds a higher percentile ranking, 28th versus 25th, and its average benchmark score of 4893 exceeds the K2100M’s 4151 by a wide margin. However, that average gap is inflated by the K2100M’s low Metal score, which is not a workload the GTS 450 even participates in.

For users prioritizing raw OpenCL compute in legacy applications, the GTS 450 is the stronger choice according to the database. Its higher memory bandwidth and superior benchmark result make it the pick for that specific workload. The K2100M, meanwhile, offers broader API coverage with Vulkan support, double the memory capacity, and a much lower power draw at 55 W versus 106 W. It also delivers higher theoretical FP32, pixel rate, and texture rate figures. But none of those theoretical advantages translated into a benchmark win in the one test where both were measured.

The verdict from the data: if the task is OpenCL compute, choose the GTS 450. If the task requires Vulkan, larger frame buffers, or minimal power consumption in a mobile form factor, the K2100M is the only one of the two with those capabilities. The GTS 450 is the performance leader in the measured test, while the K2100M is the more modern, efficient, and feature-complete part on paper, yet it loses where it counts in the actual benchmark.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 scores 4893, which is 6.7% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M’s 4587.

Q: How does the Quadro K2100M perform in Vulkan and Metal?

A: The K2100M scores 4343 in Geekbench Vulkan and 3524 in Geekbench Metal. The GTS 450 has no recorded Vulkan or Metal benchmarks.

Q: What are the memory capacities and bandwidths of the two cards?

A: The GTS 450 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 57.73 GB/s bandwidth. The K2100M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus but with 48.13 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The K2100M has 576 shading units, while the GTS 450 has 192. The K2100M also has 48 TMUs versus 32 on the GTS 450.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The GTS 450’s GF106 chip has 4.9 million transistors per mm² on a 40 nm process. The K2100M’s GK106S chip has 11.5 million transistors per mm² on a 28 nm process.

Q: Which GPU supports Vulkan?

A: Only the K2100M lists Vulkan support (version 1.2.175). The GTS 450 has no Vulkan entry in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce GTS 450 wins in the only benchmark both cards share: Geekbench OpenCL, where it is 6.7% ahead. It also has higher memory bandwidth (57.73 GB/s versus 48.13 GB/s) and a better overall percentile rank (28th versus 25th). Its average benchmark score of 4893 is higher than the K2100M’s 4151. For any workload that relies on OpenCL compute and benefits from faster memory throughput, the GTS 450 is the data-backed winner.

The Quadro K2100M wins in areas the GTS 450 cannot contest. It has Vulkan support, which the GTS 450 lacks entirely. It carries twice the memory capacity at 2 GB. Its theoretical compute metrics are all higher: 768.4 GFLOPS FP32 versus 601.3 GFLOPS, 8.004 GPixel/s versus 6.264 GPixel/s, and 32.02 GTexel/s versus 25.06 GTexel/s. It draws less than half the power, 55 W versus 106 W, and requires no external power connector. It is also built on a more advanced 28 nm process with more than double the transistor count.

Use-case split: the GTS 450 suits desktop OpenCL compute tasks where memory bandwidth and measured performance matter more than power efficiency or API breadth. The K2100M suits mobile workstation deployments where Vulkan support, larger memory capacity, low power draw, and higher theoretical fill rates are priorities, even if its actual OpenCL score trails.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every hardware category except bus width, ROP count, memory type, and API baseline.

• Chip and Architecture: GF106 on Fermi versus GK106S on Kepler.
• Process Node: 40 nm versus 28 nm, both TSMC.
• Transistors: 1,170 million versus 2,540 million.
• Die Size: 238 mm² versus 221 mm².
• Transistor Density: 4.9M / mm² versus 11.5M / mm².
• Memory Clock: 902 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) versus 752 MHz (3 Gbps effective).
• Memory Size: 1024 MB versus 2 GB.
• Memory Bandwidth: 57.73 GB/s versus 48.13 GB/s.
• Shading Units: 192 versus 576.
• TMUs: 32 versus 48.
• Pixel Rate: 6.264 GPixel/s versus 8.004 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: 25.06 GTexel/s versus 32.02 GTexel/s.
• FP32: 601.3 GFLOPS versus 768.4 GFLOPS.
• TDP: 106 W versus 55 W.
• Slot Width: Dual-slot versus MXM Module.
• Power Connectors: 1x 6-pin versus None.
• Suggested PSU: 300 W versus not listed.
• Bus Interface: PCIe 2.0 x16 versus MXM-A (3.0).
• Display Outputs: 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a versus Portable Device Dependent.
• Vulkan: Not listed versus 1.2.175.
• Release Date: 2010-09-12 versus 2013-07-22.
• Core Clocks: The GTS 450 has no base or boost clock listed; the K2100M has both at 667 MHz.
• Dimensions: The GTS 450 is 210 mm long and 111 mm high; the K2100M has no listed dimensions.
• Launch MSRP: The GTS 450 launched at 129 USD; the K2100M has no recorded launch MSRP.

Both cards share 16 ROPs, a 128-bit memory bus, GDDR5 memory, DirectX 12 (11_0) support, and OpenGL 4.6 support. Both are end-of-life products. The GTS 450 is from the GeForce 400 generation, while the K2100M is from the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M) generation.