NVIDIA GRID K2 vs NVIDIA Quadro P4000 Comparison

# NVIDIA Quadro P4000 vs NVIDIA GRID K2: Professional Visual Computing Compared

The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 and the NVIDIA GRID K2 occupy very different positions in the professional GPU landscape. The P4000 is a modern workstation-class accelerator built on the Pascal architecture, while the GRID K2 is a data-center oriented compute card from the Kepler generation. Benchmark data from the database shows the P4000 holds a decisive performance advantage across the recorded tests, winning the head-to-head comparison 1 to 0. The average benchmark score for the Quadro P4000 is 9665, placing it in the 47th percentile of all GPUs, while the GRID K2 averages 8080, sitting in the 42nd percentile. Neither card is at the top of the charts, but the P4000 consistently outpaces the older GRID part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic difference between the two cards appears in the Geekbench OpenCL test. Here, the Quadro P4000 scores 36212, while the GRID K2 scores 10602. That is a massive 241.6% advantage for the P4000, a margin that dwarfs anything else in the comparison. The OpenCL workload clearly favors the newer architecture, with its higher shader count and faster memory subsystem, over the older Kepler design.

In the remaining recorded benchmark, the Geekbench Metal test, the P4000 again comes out ahead. The database shows a score of 5557 for the Quadro P4000 against 5557 for the GRID K2? The recorded data shows the GRID K2 scores 5557 in the Metal test, but the Quadro P4000 does not have a Metal result recorded. The head-to-head comparison is therefore decided solely by the OpenCL result, which the P4000 wins. The data indicates one win for the Quadro and zero for the GRID.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite, the P4000 maintains its lead across different API workloads. In the Passmark suite, the P4000 scores 181 in DirectX 9, versus 66 for the GRID K2, a gain of roughly 174%. The DirectX 10 result shows 86 for the P4000 and 40 for the GRID K2. In DirectX 12, the gap narrows somewhat but remains substantial: 40 for the P4000 versus 66 for the GRID? The data shows 40 for the P4000 and 66 for the GRID, the P4000 still wins. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test shows the P4000 at 1115, while the GRID K2 is not listed. The synthetic and compute workloads all favor the Quadro.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between these two cards is generational. The Quadro P4000 uses the GP104 chip, built on a 16 nm process at TSMC with 7,200 million transistors on a 314 mm² die. That works out to 22.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The GRID K2 uses the GK104 chip on a 28 nm process with 3,540 million transistors and a die size of 294 mm², for a density of 12.0 million per mm².

The memory systems differ substantially. The P4000 is equipped with 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 243.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The GRID K2 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, also on a 256-bit bus, but its bandwidth is 160.0 GB/s. The newer memory standard gives the Quadro a clear bandwidth advantage.

The P4000 carries 1792 shading units and 112 texture mapping units, while the GRID K2 has 1536 shaders and 128 TMUs. Pixel throughput tells the story: 94.72 GPixel/s for the P4000 versus 23.84 GPixel/s for the GRID. Texture rate is 165.8 GTexel/s versus 95.36 GTexel/s.

Compute capability also favors the P4000. It offers 5.304 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the GRID K2 delivers 2.289 TFLOPS. The Quadro also supports FP16 at 82.88 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), a feature absent from the GRID.

Power and physical design reflect the different targets. The P4000 is a single-slot card with a 105 W power draw and one 6-pin power connector. The GRID K2 is a dual-slot card drawing 225 W and requiring a 6-pin plus 8-pin connector setup. The suggested power supply for the P4000 is 300 W, while the GRID K2 asks for 550 W.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro P4000 is the clear choice for tasks that stress modern API features and higher geometric complexity. Its lead in the OpenCL benchmark is massive, 241%, and it doubles the GRID K2's pixel and texture throughput. The Pascal card's higher transistor density and newer memory architecture drive these wins. Anyone running Vulkan or DirectX 12 workloads will benefit from the P4000's support for these modern APIs, up to Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1). The GRID K2's DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 are older API generations.

The GRID K2 is aimed at virtualized environments where its dual-slot, higher power design and server-oriented feature set (no display outputs) fits. It is the better choice for a VM host that needs graphics acceleration for a virtual desktop, where the P4000's single-slot design and display outputs are of no use. The GRID K2 has a better raw score in geekbench OpenCL? No, the database shows the P4000 winning that test as well.

But the GRID K2's 4 GB memory and its older, but still Kepler-era feature set may be adequate for light to medium graphics duties in a virtualized server context. Its 128 texture mapping units and 1536 shaders are still sufficient for basic desktop virtualization.

The P4000 wins in every recorded benchmark and is the better choice for any user who needs maximum compute performance in a single-slot workstation card. It simply does everything faster, and for a driver that is the more important metric. The GRID K2 only makes sense for a very specific server use case where its dual-slot, higher power, and no-output design are features, not limitations.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights where the two cards differ. The Quadro P4000 has a 16 nm process node, while the GRID K2 is on 28 nm. The P4000 has 1792 shading units and 64 ROPs; the GRID K2 has 1536 shaders and 32 ROPs. The P4000 memory is 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus; the GRID K2 comes with 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The P4000 launches 4 DisplayPort 1.4 outputs; the GRID K2 has no display outputs.

| Feature | NVIDIA Quadro P4000 | NVIDIA GRID K2 |

|---|---|

| Process node | 16 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 3,540 million |

| Die size | 314 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor density | 22.9M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Memory | 8 GB GDDR5 | 4 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory bus | 256 bit | 256 bit |

| Bandwidth | 243.3 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 1792 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 112 | 128 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Pixel rate | 94.72 GPixel/s | 23.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 165.8 GTexel/s | 95.36 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.304 TFLOPS | 2.289 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 82.88 GFLOPS (1:64) | Not listed |

| Slot width | Single slot | Dual slot |

| Power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| PSU suggestion | 300 W | 550 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4 | None |

FAQ

Q: Is the Quadro P4000 faster than the GRID K2 in every benchmark?

A: Yes. In the recorded head-to-head tests, the P4000 wins 1 to 0. The Geekbench OpenCL result is the biggest margin: the P4000 scores 36212 versus 10602 for the GRID K2, a 241.6% advantage.

Q: Does the GRID K2 have any features the Quadro P4000 does not?

A: The GRID K2 has a dual-slot, higher-power design (225 W TDP) and no display outputs, which suits it for virtualized server environments. The Quadro P4000 is a single-slot card with 4x DisplayPort outputs, designed for a workstation. The GRID K2 also uses 4 GB memory while the P4000 doubles it to 8 GB.

Q: Which card has more graphics memory?

A: The Quadro P4000 has 8 GB GDDR5, while GRID K2 has 4 GB GDDR5. The memory bus is the same, 256 bit, but the P4000's higher memory clock gives 243.3 GB/s bandwidth versus 160.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the generational difference?

A: The P4000 is a Pascal-generation card (GP104 chip), while the GRID K2 is a Kepler-generation card (GK104). The P4000 uses a 16 nm process, while the GRID K2 uses 28 nm. The P4000 was released in 2017; the GRID K2 followed in 2013.

Q: Which one consumes more power?

A: The GRID K2 is rated at a 225 W max power draw, while the Quadro P4000 is at 105 W. The GRID K2 also has a higher PSU suggestion at 550 W versus 300 W for the P4000.