GeForce RTX 3090 vs Quadro K500M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro K500M with GeForce RTX 3090, including specs and performance data.
RTX 3090 outperforms K500M by a whopping 5432% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1123 | 38 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 18.05 |
| Power efficiency | 2.54 | 14.06 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | GK107 | GA102 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 June 2012 (14 years ago) | 1 September 2020 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $1,499 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 192 | 10496 |
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz | 1395 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1695 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,270 million | 28,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 350 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 13.60 | 556.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.3264 TFLOPS | 35.58 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 112 |
| TMUs | 16 | 328 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 328 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 82 |
| L1 Cache | 16 KB | 10.3 MB |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 6 MB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 336 mm |
| Width | no data | 3-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 12-pin |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR6X |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 24 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1219 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 12.8 GB/s | 936.2 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | + | 1.2 |
| CUDA | + | 8.5 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 3−4
−6133%
| 187
+6133%
|
| 1440p | 2−3
−5900%
| 120
+5900%
|
| 4K | 1−2
−8000%
| 81
+8000%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 8.02 |
| 1440p | no data | 12.49 |
| 4K | no data | 18.51 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−10350%
|
209
+10350%
|
| Palworld | 4−5
−5875%
|
239
+5875%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−17100%
|
172
+17100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−8800%
|
178
+8800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−10300%
|
208
+10300%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−9967%
|
300−350
+9967%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−3529%
|
254
+3529%
|
| Palworld | 4−5
−5725%
|
233
+5725%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−1822%
|
170−180
+1822%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−1028%
|
350−400
+1028%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−15700%
|
158
+15700%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 27−30
−930%
|
270−280
+930%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−7600%
|
154
+7600%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−1256%
|
217
+1256%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−9700%
|
196
+9700%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−9967%
|
300−350
+9967%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−3429%
|
247
+3429%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−17500%
|
176
+17500%
|
| Palworld | 4−5
−5100%
|
208
+5100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−1822%
|
170−180
+1822%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−5171%
|
369
+5171%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−1028%
|
350−400
+1028%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−14500%
|
146
+14500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−6700%
|
136
+6700%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−1231%
|
213
+1231%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−9050%
|
183
+9050%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−3000%
|
217
+3000%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−1822%
|
170−180
+1822%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−2500%
|
182
+2500%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−825%
|
296
+825%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−9967%
|
300−350
+9967%
|
| Palworld | 4−5
−3825%
|
157
+3825%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−7600%
|
231
+7600%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 7−8
−7057%
|
500−550
+7057%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−1358%
|
170−180
+1358%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−10925%
|
400−450
+10925%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 93 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 171 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−6467%
|
197
+6467%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−7550%
|
153
+7550%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−7450%
|
150−160
+7450%
|
| Palworld | 1−2
−11900%
|
120
+11900%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−1113%
|
182
+1113%
|
| Valorant | 7−8
−4457%
|
300−350
+4457%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 0−1 | 202 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−4700%
|
95−100
+4700%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−3850%
|
75−80
+3850%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 349
+0%
|
349
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 270
+0%
|
270
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Counter-Strike 2 | 347
+0%
|
347
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 309
+0%
|
309
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 171
+0%
|
171
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 150
+0%
|
150
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 115
+0%
|
115
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 130
+0%
|
130
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 59
+0%
|
59
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 76
+0%
|
76
+0%
|
| Palworld | 96
+0%
|
96
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 154
+0%
|
154
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 113
+0%
|
113
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 46
+0%
|
46
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 108
+0%
|
108
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 153
+0%
|
153
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Palworld | 72
+0%
|
72
+0%
|
This is how Quadro K500M and RTX 3090 compete in popular games:
- RTX 3090 is 6133% faster in 1080p
- RTX 3090 is 5900% faster in 1440p
- RTX 3090 is 8000% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 3090 is 17500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 3090 performs better in 44 tests (71%)
- there's a draw in 18 tests (29%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.15 | 63.62 |
| Recency | 1 June 2012 | 1 September 2020 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 24 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 350 Watt |
Quadro K500M has 900% lower power consumption.
RTX 3090, on the other hand, has a 5432% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 3090 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K500M in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro K500M is a mobile workstation graphics card while GeForce RTX 3090 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
