NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q vs NVIDIA T1000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a single head-to-head comparison between the NVIDIA T1000 and the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q, and it is decisive in favor of the newer Turing-based card. In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the T1000 scores 34,874 points against the GRID M60-1Q’s 31,220 points, yielding an 11.7% performance advantage for the T1000. This is the only direct benchmark pairing in the database, so the analysis rests on this metric, but it is a meaningful one for graphics API workloads.

Contextualizing the T1000’s score, its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 36,289, placing it in the 80th percentile of all GPUs tracked. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon RX 5300M and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X, both averaging 36,529 and 36,530 respectively, with the T1000 trailing each by a negligible 0.7%. It also edges out the AMD Radeon Pro Duo (35,860, a 1.2% lead) and the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 (35,520, a 2.2% lead). These figures suggest the T1000 sits in a competitive mid-range band, despite its modest 4 GB memory configuration.

The GRID M60-1Q, by contrast, posts a lower average benchmark score of 31,220, which corresponds to the 76th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 matches it exactly at 31,206 (0% delta), while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER sits at 31,087 (0.4% behind the GRID), and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell and NVIDIA TITAN RTX are 1% and 1.4% ahead, respectively. The GRID M60-1Q’s average score is thus roughly 14% lower than the T1000’s average, which aligns with the 11.7% gap seen in the direct Vulkan comparison.

It is worth remembering the GRID M60-1Q has no recorded OpenCL benchmark, while the T1000 shows a Geekbench OpenCL score of 37,704. That OpenCL result is actually higher than the T1000’s Vulkan score, suggesting the T1000’s compute-oriented performance is stronger than its graphics API showing. The GRID M60-1Q’s absence from OpenCL testing means no direct comparison can be made in that API, but the T1000’s OpenCL number reinforces its overall capability.

The Verdict

From the data, the NVIDIA T1000 is the clear winner in the single head-to-head benchmark. Its 11.7% Vulkan lead over the GRID M60-1Q is substantial, and its average benchmark score (36,289) is 16.2% higher than the GRID’s (31,220). The T1000 also occupies a higher percentile rank (80th vs 76th), indicating better overall standing in the database’s GPU hierarchy.

The T1000 is the appropriate choice for workloads that rely on modern graphics APIs and compute tasks. Its Turing architecture supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, matching the GRID M60-1Q’s API support, but the T1000 delivers higher performance per clock and per watt based on the recorded figures. The T1000’s 50 W TDP versus the GRID’s 225 W TDP is a stark contrast, making the T1000 far more efficient for any deployment where power draw is a constraint.

The GRID M60-1Q, however, has its own niche. With 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, it possesses a wider execution resource pool than the T1000’s 896 shaders, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its theoretical FP32 throughput is 4.825 TFLOPS, nearly double the T1000’s 2.500 TFLOPS. In raw compute-heavy scenarios that can fully utilize its larger parallel fabric, the GRID could theoretically outperform the T1000, but the benchmark data does not show this happening in Vulkan, and no compute-specific test is available for the GRID.

The GRID M60-1Q is also a dual-slot card with no display outputs, designed for virtualized environments where rendering is done remotely and streamed. Its 1 GB memory is a severe limitation for modern workloads, especially compared to the T1000’s 4 GB. For any user needing direct display output or more than 1 GB of framebuffer, the T1000 is the only viable choice from this data. The GRID’s 225 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU also make it a more demanding installation, whereas the T1000 requires no power connectors and a 250 W PSU.

In summary, the T1000 wins on benchmark performance, efficiency, memory capacity, and practical usability. The GRID M60-1Q retains theoretical compute advantages and a wider memory bus, but these do not translate into higher scores in the recorded data. Users prioritizing measured performance should select the T1000; those targeting virtualized GPU workloads with no local display needs might still consider the GRID, but the data does not support it as a performance leader.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs belong to different architectural generations, which explains most of their behavioral differences. The NVIDIA T1000 is built on the Turing architecture (chip TU117), fabricated on TSMC’s 12 nm process. It integrates 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.5 million per mm². Turing introduced significant improvements in integer and mixed-precision throughput, as well as enhanced shading and rasterization efficiency compared to older designs.

The NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture (chip GM204), manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 5,200 million transistors onto a much larger 398 mm² die, but the older process results in a lower transistor density of 13.1 million per mm². Maxwell 2.0 was designed for high raw throughput, with large shader arrays and high fill rates, but it lacks newer features such as dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores found in later architectures. Neither card includes RT or tensor cores in the recorded specifications.

The T1000’s 12 nm process gives it a significant efficiency advantage. Its 50 W TDP is a fraction of the GRID’s 225 W, and its 1065 MHz base clock boosts to 1395 MHz, while the GRID runs at a 557 MHz base and 1178 MHz boost. The T1000 also uses GDDR6 memory at 10 Gbps effective, whereas the GRID relies on GDDR5 at 5 Gbps. Despite the GRID’s wider 256-bit bus delivering 160.4 GB/s bandwidth, the T1000’s 128-bit bus achieves 160.0 GB/s, a near match, thanks to the faster memory technology.

Architecturally, the GRID M60-1Q is a virtualization-focused product with no display outputs, while the T1000 offers four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a connections. The T1000 is a single-slot card with no power connectors, while the GRID is dual-slot and requires a single 8-pin connector. These differences reflect their intended use cases: the T1000 as a workstation card for local rendering, the GRID as a server-side GPU for remote desktop or cloud workloads.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two cards differ, based on the recorded data.

| Specification | NVIDIA T1000 | NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Turing | Maxwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 4,700 million | 5,200 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 398 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 23.5M / mm² | 13.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1065 MHz | 557 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1395 MHz | 1178 MHz |

| Memory Speed | 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective) | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Shading Units | 896 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 56 | 128 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 44.64 GPixel/s | 75.39 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 78.12 GTexel/s | 150.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.500 TFLOPS | 4.825 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 5.000 TFLOPS (2:1) | Not specified |

| TDP | 50 W | 225 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 550 W |

| Display Outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | No outputs |

| Length | 156 mm (6.1 inches) | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Height | 69 mm (2.7 inches) | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2021-05-05 | 2015-08-29 |

Both cards share the same PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. Neither has RT or tensor cores. The T1000’s FP16 capability (5.000 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio) is present, while the GRID M60-1Q has no recorded FP16 figure.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the recorded benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 wins the only head-to-head benchmark, scoring 34,874 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 31,220 for the GRID M60-1Q, an 11.7% advantage. The T1000’s average benchmark score across all tests is 36,289, compared to 31,220 for the GRID.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The T1000 is within 0.7% of the AMD Radeon RX 5300M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X, and 1.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Duo, with a 2.2% lead over the NVIDIA Quadro GV100. The GRID M60-1Q matches the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 exactly, is 0.4% ahead of the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER, and trails the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell and TITAN RTX by 1% and 1.4%, respectively.

Q: What are the key memory differences?

A: The T1000 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GRID M60-1Q has only 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.4 GB/s. The GRID’s bandwidth is marginally higher, but its capacity is a quarter of the T1000’s.

Q: Which card has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The GRID M60-1Q has higher theoretical FP32 performance at 4.825 TFLOPS, versus 2.500 TFLOPS for the T1000. It also has more shading units (2048 vs 896), TMUs (128 vs 56), and ROPs (64 vs 32). However, the T1000 offers FP16 compute at 5.000 TFLOPS, which the GRID does not list.

Q: What are the power and physical requirements?

A: The T1000 has a 50 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and needs a 250 W suggested PSU. It is a single-slot card measuring 156 mm in length. The GRID M60-1Q has a 225 W TDP, requires one 8-pin connector, and needs a 550 W suggested PSU. It is dual-slot and 267 mm long.

Q: Which card supports display output?

A: The T1000 has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The GRID M60-1Q has no display outputs, meaning it is designed solely for virtualized or remote rendering without direct monitor connection.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: Both are marked as end-of-life in the database. The T1000 was released on 2021-05-05, while the GRID M60-1Q was released on 2015-08-29.