GMA 3000 vs FirePro D300

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking448not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.65no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Generation 4.0 (2006−2007)
GPU code namePitcairnBroadwater
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date18 January 2014 (11 years ago)1 June 2006 (18 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1280no data
Core clock speed850 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rate68.001.600
Floating-point processing power2.176 TFLOPSno data
ROPs324
TMUs804

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length242 mmno data
Width1-slotno data

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1270 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth162.6 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors4x DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)9.0c
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 18 January 2014 1 June 2006
Chip lithography 28 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 13 Watt

FirePro D300 has an age advantage of 7 years, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

GMA 3000, on the other hand, has 1053.8% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FirePro D300 and GMA 3000. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that FirePro D300 is a workstation card while GMA 3000 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD FirePro D300
FirePro D300
Intel GMA 3000
GMA 3000

Other comparisons

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

Community ratings

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


3.9 29 votes

Rate FirePro D300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 45 votes

Rate GMA 3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.