ATI FirePro M7740 vs Quadro M3000M

Place in the ranking	426	949
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	13.70	2.57
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code name	GM204	M97
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	18 August 2015 (10 years ago)	4 August 2009 (17 years ago)

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	1,024	640
Core clock speed	1050 MHz	650 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	826 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	60 Watt
Texture fill rate	67.20	20.80
Floating-point processing power	2.15 TFLOPS	0.832 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	64	32
L1 Cache	384 KB	128 KB
L2 Cache	2 MB	128 KB

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	large	large
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	846 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160 GB/s	54.14 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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	No outputs
Display Port	1.2	no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus	+	-
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12	10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	6.4	4.1
OpenGL	4.5	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	+	N/A
CUDA	5.2	-

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.

M3000M 13.28
+567%

ATI M7740 1.99

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

M3000M 27405
+314%

ATI M7740 6626

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	60 +650%	8−9 −650%
4K	25 +733%	3−4 −733%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2	70−75 +1750%	4−5 −1750%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +600%	4−5 −600%
Palworld	30−35 +417%	6−7 −417%
Resident Evil 4 Remake	27−30 +2700%	1−2 −2700%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5	55−60 +1080%	5−6 −1080%
Counter-Strike 2	70−75 +1750%	4−5 −1750%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +600%	4−5 −600%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +780%	5−6 −780%
Fortnite	75−80 +756%	9−10 −756%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +470%	10−11 −470%
Palworld	30−35 +417%	6−7 −417%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +345%	10−12 −345%
Valorant	110−120 +192%	35−40 −192%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5	55−60 +1080%	5−6 −1080%
Counter-Strike 2	70−75 +1750%	4−5 −1750%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	180−190 +351%	40−45 −351%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +600%	4−5 −600%
Dota 2	85−90 +300%	21−24 −300%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +780%	5−6 −780%
Fortnite	75−80 +756%	9−10 −756%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +470%	10−11 −470%
Grand Theft Auto V	49 +1533%	3−4 −1533%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +833%	3−4 −833%
Palworld	30−35 +417%	6−7 −417%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +345%	10−12 −345%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	42 +425%	8−9 −425%
Valorant	110−120 +192%	35−40 −192%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5	55−60 +1080%	5−6 −1080%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +600%	4−5 −600%
Dota 2	85−90 +300%	21−24 −300%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +780%	5−6 −780%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +470%	10−11 −470%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +345%	10−12 −345%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	22 +175%	8−9 −175%
Valorant	110−120 +192%	35−40 −192%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite	75−80 +756%	9−10 −756%
Palworld	30−35 +417%	6−7 −417%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	100−105 +614%	14−16 −614%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 +600%	3−4 −600%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−105 +400%	20−22 −400%
Valorant	120−130 +821%	14−16 −821%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5	35−40 +640%	5−6 −640%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +1350%	2−3 −1350%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +560%	5−6 −560%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite	27−30 +867%	3−4 −867%
Palworld	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Grand Theft Auto V	35 +133%	14−16 −133%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Palworld	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14 +600%	2−3 −600%
Valorant	60−65 +540%	10−11 −540%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Dota 2	45−50 +1125%	4−5 −1125%
Far Cry 5	14−16	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	21−24	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%

4K
Epic

Fortnite	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Palworld	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%

This is how M3000M and ATI M7740 compete in popular games:

M3000M is 650% faster in 1080p
M3000M is 733% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Resident Evil 4 Remake, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the M3000M is 2700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, M3000M surpassed ATI M7740 in all 52 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	13.28	1.99
Recency	18 August 2015	4 August 2009
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	60 Watt

M3000M has a 567% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 43% more advanced lithography process.

ATI M7740, on the other hand, has 25% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M3000M is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M7740 in performance tests.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M

GT 720M

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M

R5 M435

NVIDIA Quadro M4000M

Arc B580

NVIDIA Quadro M4000M

Graphics 4 Xe Mobile

AMD Radeon R9 M395X

RTX 5050

NVIDIA Quadro M3000M

GeForce 8600M GT

NVIDIA GTX 880M

660 Ti

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M

GeForce 8800M GTS

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M

LX 7G100

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M

Pro 18-Core GPU

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.8 389 votes

Rate Quadro M3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

5 2 votes

Rate FirePro M7740 on a scale of 1 to 5:

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M3000M or FirePro M7740, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.