NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M vs NVIDIA GRID K2 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits these two Kepler-based NVIDIA cards almost perfectly down the middle. Each card claims one decisive victory in the Geekbench suite, and the margins are stark rather than marginal. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M dominates the Metal test with a score of 10,458 against the GRID K2’s 5,557 — a 46.9% deficit for the GRID K2. That is not a close contest; it is a landslide in favor of the mobile part. Conversely, the GRID K2 returns the favor in OpenCL, scoring 10,602 versus the GTX 880M’s 5,622, an 88.6% swing in the opposite direction. The GRID K2 does not merely win OpenCL — it nearly doubles the GTX 880M’s output.

These results are particularly striking because the two cards share identical core counts. Both pack 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The 46.9% Metal gap and the 88.6% OpenCL gap cannot be explained by raw hardware inventory. The difference lies in how each card is configured and driven. The GTX 880M runs at a base clock of 954 MHz and a boost clock of 993 MHz, while the GRID K2’s clock speeds are not listed in the data. The GTX 880M’s pixel rate of 31.78 GPixel/s and texture rate of 127.1 GTexel/s substantially outpace the GRID K2’s 23.84 GPixel/s and 95.36 GTexel/s. The GRID K2 compensates with a higher FP32 throughput of 2.289 TFLOPS? No — actually, the GTX 880M posts 3.050 TFLOPS against the GRID K2’s 2.289 TFLOPS. The GRID K2’s OpenCL win is therefore not a matter of raw compute horsepower; it is a matter of workload optimization and driver behavior.

The average benchmark scores tell a nuanced story. The GRID K2 averages 8,080, while the GTX 880M averages 8,040 — a 0.5% difference. The GRID K2’s nearest rival list places the GTX 880M fourth, with the GRID K2 ahead by just 0.5%. The GTX 880M’s own rival list mirrors this, showing the GRID K2 ahead by 0.5% from the GTX 880M’s perspective. These two cards are, on average, statistical twins. The head-to-head deltas of 46.9% and 88.6% are outliers driven by API-specific performance, not general-purpose superiority. The percentile rankings confirm this: both sit at the 42nd percentile among all GPUs. Neither card is a standout in the broader market, but against each other, they are evenly matched with diametrically opposed strengths.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M wins decisively in Metal-based workloads. Its 10,458 Metal score is nearly double the GRID K2’s 5,557. This suggests the GTX 880M is the better choice for applications that leverage Apple’s Metal API, whether in compute tasks or graphics rendering. The GTX 880M also holds the advantage in raw clock-driven metrics: its base clock of 954 MHz and boost clock of 993 MHz are specified, whereas the GRID K2’s clocks are absent from the data. The GTX 880M’s pixel rate of 31.78 GPixel/s and texture rate of 127.1 GTexel/s are 33% and 33% higher than the GRID K2’s respective figures of 23.84 GPixel/s and 95.36 GTexel/s. For fill-rate-bound scenarios, the GTX 880M is the clear pick.

The NVIDIA GRID K2 wins in OpenCL. Its 10,602 OpenCL score crushes the GTX 880M’s 5,622. This is a 88.6% advantage, the largest margin of any metric in this comparison. The GRID K2’s FP32 throughput of 2.289 TFLOPS, while lower than the GTX 880M’s 3.050 TFLOPS, does not prevent it from dominating the OpenCL benchmark. The GRID K2 also offers 4 GB of GDDR5 memory at 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is insufficient to explain the OpenCL gap on its own — the GTX 880M has 8 GB at the same 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GRID K2’s OpenCL win likely stems from its intended role as a server-side virtualization card, where OpenCL compute is a primary workload. The GTX 880M, as a mobile gaming part, may prioritize graphics APIs over compute-oriented OpenCL.

For average daily use, neither card holds a meaningful edge. The GRID K2’s average score of 8,080 versus the GTX 880M’s 8,040 is a 0.5% difference — negligible in real-world terms. Both cards are end-of-life products with identical architecture, process node, and transistor counts. The choice between them hinges entirely on the API environment and the specific workload.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GRID K2 averages 8,080, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M averages 8,040. The GRID K2 leads by 0.5%.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Geekbench Metal?

A: The GTX 880M scores 10,458 in Metal, versus the GRID K2’s 5,557. The GTX 880M wins by 46.9%.

Q: What about Geekbench OpenCL performance?

A: The GRID K2 scores 10,602 in OpenCL, versus the GTX 880M’s 5,622. The GRID K2 wins by 88.6%.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The GTX 880M has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the GRID K2 has 4 GB. Both use a 256-bit bus and deliver 160.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are these cards comparable in raw compute specifications?

A: Both have 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 880M has higher clock rates — 954 MHz base and 993 MHz boost — versus the GRID K2’s unspecified clocks. The GTX 880M also posts higher FP32 performance at 3.050 TFLOPS versus 2.289 TFLOPS for the GRID K2.

Q: Which card has a better percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: Both are tied at the 42nd percentile, indicating identical overall standing in the performance distribution.

Specification Differences

The two cards share a core foundation but diverge in several key specifications. The GRID K2 uses a 4 GB GDDR5 memory configuration, while the GTX 880M doubles that to 8 GB. Both run on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. Clock speeds differ significantly: the GTX 880M has a base clock of 954 MHz and a boost clock of 993 MHz, while the GRID K2’s base and boost clocks are not provided in the data. Memory clock is identical at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for both.

Pixel rate and texture rate favor the GTX 880M. The GTX 880M delivers 31.78 GPixel/s and 127.1 GTexel/s, versus the GRID K2’s 23.84 GPixel/s and 95.36 GTexel/s. FP32 compute also favors the GTX 880M at 3.050 TFLOPS, against the GRID K2’s 2.289 TFLOPS. Power draw is a major differentiator: the GRID K2 consumes 225 W TDP, while the GTX 880M draws just 122 W — a 103 W difference. The GRID K2 requires a dual-slot cooler and 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors, with a suggested 550 W PSU. The GTX 880M uses an MXM Module form factor with no power connectors and no suggested PSU listed. The GRID K2 measures 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length, while the GTX 880M has no listed dimensions. Display outputs differ: the GRID K2 has no outputs, while the GTX 880M’s outputs are portable device dependent.

Release timing also differs. The GRID K2 launched on 2013-05-10, while the GTX 880M followed on 2014-03-11. The GRID K2 had a launch MSRP of 5,199 USD; the GTX 880M has no listed launch price. The GTX 880M has a predecessor (GeForce 700M) and a successor (GeForce 900M), while the GRID K2 lists neither. Both are end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the same GK104 chip using NVIDIA’s Kepler architecture on a 28 nm process at TSMC. Transistor counts are identical at 3,540 million, and die size is the same at 294 mm², yielding a transistor density of 12.0M per mm² for both. The shader configuration is also identical: 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Neither card features ray tracing cores or tensor cores. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175.

The architectural differences are minimal on paper but significant in application. The GRID K2 belongs to the GRID (K2) generation, while the GTX 880M belongs to the GeForce 800M generation. The GRID K2 is a server-side virtualization card with no display outputs, designed for data center workloads. The GTX 880M is a mobile GPU in MXM-B (3.0) form factor, designed for laptops and portable devices. The GRID K2’s dual-slot cooler and external power connectors contrast with the GTX 880M’s MXM module with no power connectors. Neither card has a codename listed.

The GRID K2’s higher TDP of 225 W versus the GTX 880M’s 122 W suggests a different thermal and power delivery design, likely tuned for sustained server operation. The GTX 880M’s higher clock rates (954 MHz base, 993 MHz boost) and higher FP32 throughput (3.050 TFLOPS) indicate a more aggressive performance profile despite lower power draw. The GRID K2’s unspecified clocks and lower FP32 (2.289 TFLOPS) point to a more conservative design, possibly optimized for multi-tenancy and virtualization rather than raw single-task performance. The identical transistor count and die size mean the architectural difference is purely in configuration and intended use case, not in fundamental silicon design.

The Verdict

The data defines the choice clearly: pick the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M for Metal-based workloads and any application that benefits from higher clock rates, pixel throughput, and texture throughput. Its 10,458 Metal score is unbeatable in this pairing, and its 31.78 GPixel/s and 127.1 GTexel/s rates are 33% higher than the GRID K2’s. Its 8 GB memory capacity doubles the GRID K2’s 4 GB, making it the better option for memory-intensive tasks. The GTX 880M also does all this at 122 W TDP, nearly half the GRID K2’s 225 W draw, and it includes boost clock support at 993 MHz. For a mobile or portable device, the GTX 880M is the only sensible choice — the GRID K2’s dual-slot server form factor and lack of display outputs make it unsuitable for end-user systems.

Pick the NVIDIA GRID K2 for OpenCL compute environments. Its 10,602 OpenCL score is 88.6% higher than the GTX 880M’s, and that margin dwarfs every other difference between the two cards. The GRID K2’s 2.289 TFLOPS FP32 performance, while lower than the GTX 880M’s 3.050 TFLOPS, does not hinder its OpenCL dominance. The GRID K2 is designed for server deployment — no display outputs, dual-slot cooling, and a 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power requirement — making it a data center card, not a consumer part. Its 4 GB memory is sufficient for virtualized workloads, and its launch MSRP of 5,199 USD reflects its enterprise positioning.

In purely average terms, the GRID K2 edges out the GTX 880M by 0.5% (8,080 versus 8,040), but this margin is statistically insignificant. Both cards sit at the 42nd percentile among all GPUs, confirming their mid-pack status. The verdict hinges on workload: Metal and mobile use favor the GTX 880M; OpenCL and server use favor the GRID K2. Neither is a general-purpose winner. The GTX 880M is the better all-rounder for a user who needs a working GPU in a portable device, given its higher clocks, higher fill rates, larger memory, and lower power draw. The GRID K2 is the specialist tool for OpenCL-heavy data center tasks, where its 88.6% OpenCL advantage makes it the clear pick despite its age and higher power consumption. Choose accordingly.