NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q vs NVIDIA TITAN V Comparison

FAQ

Q: How large is the performance gap between the NVIDIA TITAN V and the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q in the database?

A: The only shared benchmark test is Geekbench Vulkan, where the TITAN V scores 152,117 against 31,220 for the GRID M60-1Q, a difference of 387.2% in favor of the TITAN V.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The TITAN V has an average benchmark score of 34,355 across its ten recorded tests, while the GRID M60-1Q has an average of 31,220 from a single Geekbench Vulkan run. The TITAN V sits at the 79th percentile of all GPUs, the GRID M60-1Q at the 76th.

Q: What are the architectural generations of these two cards?

A: The TITAN V uses the Volta architecture on a 12 nm process with the GV100 chip, while the GRID M60-1Q uses Maxwell 2.0 on a 28 nm process with the GM204 chip. Both are built by TSMC.

Q: What memory configurations do the two cards carry?

A: The TITAN V has 12 GB of HBM2 on a 3072-bit bus with 651.3 GB/s bandwidth. The GRID M60-1Q has 1024 MB (1 GB) of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the GRID M60-1Q have any display outputs?

A: No, the GRID M60-1Q is listed with "No outputs," whereas the TITAN V provides 1x HDMI 2.0 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: How do the FP32 compute figures compare?

A: The TITAN V delivers 14.90 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the GRID M60-1Q delivers 4.825 TFLOPS. The TITAN V also has FP16 capability at 29.80 TFLOPS (2:1), which the GRID M60-1Q lacks entirely.

Where Each One Wins

The data is unambiguous in raw performance: the TITAN V wins the single head-to-head benchmark (Geekbench Vulkan) by a wide margin, and it also holds the advantage across every benchmark category in the database where both have recorded scores. The GRID M60-1Q has only one recorded benchmark entry, so its wins are limited to the categories where it is the only card tested, which does not constitute a competitive advantage.

Looking at the workload split, the TITAN V is the clear winner in compute-heavy tasks. Its PassMark GPU Compute score of 9,263 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 157,265 indicate strong general-purpose compute throughput. In contrast, the GRID M60-1Q's sole data point is its Vulkan score, which is roughly one-fifth of the TITAN V's Vulkan result.

For legacy DirectX workloads, the TITAN V shows a peculiar pattern: it scores 153 in PassMark DirectX 10, 152 in DirectX 11, 81 in DirectX 12, and 213 in DirectX 9. These are all lower than its modern API scores, but there is no comparable data for the GRID M60-1Q in these tests, so no direct comparison is possible.

The GRID M60-1Q's only potential "win" is in the context of its form factor and intended use: it is a dual-slot card with no display outputs, designed for virtualized environments where rendering happens remotely. It also carries a lower TDP at 225 W versus 250 W for the TITAN V, and its suggested PSU is 550 W versus 600 W. For a datacenter deployment where power density matters, the GRID M60-1Q draws less power, but the performance per watt is not favorable given the massive compute gap.

Architecture Differences

The TITAN V is built on the Volta architecture, which introduced Tensor Cores as a dedicated hardware feature. It carries 640 Tensor Cores, a capability entirely absent from the GRID M60-1Q's Maxwell 2.0 design. This explains the TITAN V's FP16 throughput of 29.80 TFLOPS, which is exactly double its FP32 rate, a 2:1 ratio that Maxwell cannot match because it lacks native FP16 support.

The process nodes differ substantially: the TITAN V uses a 12 nm TSMC process with 21,100 million transistors on an 815 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.9 million per square millimeter. The GRID M60-1Q uses a 28 nm TSMC process with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, giving a density of 13.1 million per square millimeter. This is a generational leap in both raw transistor count and density.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The TITAN V uses HBM2 with a 3072-bit bus width, which is a stacked-memory design that provides 651.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The GRID M60-1Q uses GDDR5 on a conventional 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s. The TITAN V's bandwidth advantage is roughly fourfold, which is critical for large dataset workloads.

The shader configurations also differ: the TITAN V has 5,120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, while the GRID M60-1Q has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The TITAN V's pixel rate is 139.7 GPixel/s versus 75.39 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 465.6 GTexel/s versus 150.8 GTexel/s.

Both cards share the same API support: DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has ray tracing cores listed. The production status for both is end-of-life, though their release dates differ: the TITAN V launched in December 2017, the GRID M60-1Q in August 2015.

Specification Differences

The TITAN V and GRID M60-1Q differ in nearly every measurable specification. Clock speeds: the TITAN V has a base clock of 1200 MHz and a boost of 1455 MHz, while the GRID M60-1Q has a base of 557 MHz and a boost of 1178 MHz. Memory clocks: the TITAN V runs at 848 MHz (1696 Mbps effective), the GRID M60-1Q at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), though the effective bandwidth difference is reversed due to bus width.

Memory size is a stark difference: 12 GB versus 1024 MB. Memory type: HBM2 versus GDDR5. Bus width: 3072-bit versus 256-bit. Bandwidth: 651.3 GB/s versus 160.4 GB/s.

Compute resources: 5,120 shading units versus 2,048; 320 TMUs versus 128; 96 ROPs versus 64. The TITAN V has 640 Tensor Cores; the GRID M60-1Q has none. FP32: 14.90 TFLOPS versus 4.825 TFLOPS. FP16: 29.80 TFLOPS versus null (not supported).

Power: the TITAN V is rated at 250 W with a 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin connector and a 600 W suggested PSU. The GRID M60-1Q is rated at 225 W with a single 8-pin connector and a 550 W suggested PSU.

Physical dimensions: both are dual-slot and 267 mm long (10.5 inches). The TITAN V has a height of 112 mm and width of 40 mm; the GRID M60-1Q's height and width are not recorded. Display outputs: the TITAN V has 1x HDMI 2.0 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a; the GRID M60-1Q has none.

The TITAN V has a launch MSRP of 2,999 USD. The GRID M60-1Q has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains exactly one benchmark where both cards were tested under identical conditions: Geekbench Vulkan. The TITAN V scored 152,117, and the GRID M60-1Q scored 31,220. The delta is 387.2% in favor of the TITAN V, meaning the TITAN V outperforms the GRID M60-1Q by nearly four times in this API workload.

To put this in context, the GRID M60-1Q's Vulkan score of 31,220 places it at the 76th percentile of all GPUs, which is relatively respectable for a 2015 datacenter card. However, the TITAN V's score of 152,117 places it at the 79th percentile, and the absolute gap is so large that it overshadows any percentile comparison. The TITAN V's nearest rivals by average score include the NVIDIA RTX A1000 (34,207, 0.4% delta) and the AMD Radeon HD 7970 (34,541, -0.5% delta), which are in a completely different performance class than the GRID M60-1Q's rivals, such as the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 (31,206, 0% delta) and the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER (31,087, 0.4% delta).

Looking at the TITAN V's other recorded benchmarks, its scores range from 81 in PassMark DirectX 12 to 19805 in PassMark G3D, with a Geekbench OpenCL score of 157,265 and a PassMark GPU Compute score of 9,263. The GRID M60-1Q has no comparable entries in these tests, so the only direct numerical comparison is the Vulkan result.

The TITAN V also shows consistency across its ten benchmarks: its average score is 34,355, which is pulled up by the high Vulkan and OpenCL results and pulled down by the low PassMark DirectX scores. The GRID M60-1Q's average is its single Vulkan score, so there is no variance to analyze.

The Verdict

The data points to a decisive conclusion: for any workload that the TITAN V can handle, it is categorically faster than the GRID M60-1Q. The 387.2% lead in Vulkan is not a marginal edge; it is a generational gap that reflects the architectural differences between Volta and Maxwell 2.0.

The TITAN V is the appropriate choice for users who need maximum compute throughput, large memory capacity (12 GB versus 1 GB), and high bandwidth (651.3 GB/s versus 160.4 GB/s). Its 640 Tensor Cores and FP16 support make it suitable for machine learning inference workloads, and its display outputs allow for direct workstation use. The 79th percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms its position as a high-end part.

The GRID M60-1Q, by contrast, is positioned for virtualized GPU environments where physical display outputs are unnecessary. Its lower TDP (225 W versus 250 W) and lower suggested PSU (550 W versus 600 W) make it slightly easier to integrate into existing server infrastructure. However, its 1 GB memory capacity is severely limiting for modern workloads, and its 76th percentile ranking is misleading because that single Vulkan score is low in absolute terms.

For a user deciding between these two, the choice depends on the deployment context. If the requirement is raw performance in a physical workstation or a compute node, the TITAN V wins every measurable category. If the requirement is a low-power, headless virtualization card with no need for high-end compute, the GRID M60-1Q exists for that niche, but the data shows it is not competitive on performance.

The recorded data does not support any scenario where the GRID M60-1Q outperforms the TITAN V. The only shared benchmark is a 4-to-1 loss for the GRID M60-1Q, and its remaining specs (memory, compute units, bandwidth) are all lower. The verdict, strictly from the database, is that the TITAN V is the superior product for any performance-sensitive task, while the GRID M60-1Q is a legacy virtualization part that the data cannot justify on performance grounds.