Quadro K3000M vs FirePro M6100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro M6100 and Quadro K3000M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FirePro M6100
2013
2 GB GDDR5
5.49
+29.5%

FirePro M6100 outperforms K3000M by a significant 29% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking572644
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.750.86
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameBonaireN14E-Q1
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date1 October 2013 (10 years ago)1 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$155
Current price$120 $223 (1.4x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

FirePro M6100 has 220% better value for money than K3000M.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores768576
Core clock speed1100 MHz654 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data75 Watt
Texture fill rate51.6031.39
Floating-point performance1,651 gflops753.4 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on FirePro M6100 and Quadro K3000M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizelargelarge
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed6000 MHz2800 MHz
Memory bandwidth88 GB/s89.6 GB/s
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDAno data+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FirePro M6100 5.49
+29.5%
K3000M 4.24

FirePro M6100 outperforms Quadro K3000M by 29% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

FirePro M6100 2122
+29.6%
K3000M 1637

FirePro M6100 outperforms Quadro K3000M by 30% in Passmark.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

FirePro M6100 5369
+121%
K3000M 2427

FirePro M6100 outperforms Quadro K3000M by 121% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

FirePro M6100 19876
+67%
K3000M 11902

FirePro M6100 outperforms Quadro K3000M by 67% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

FirePro M6100 13300
+215%
K3000M 4216

FirePro M6100 outperforms Quadro K3000M by 215% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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:

900p40−45
+21.2%
33
−21.2%
Full HD60
+33.3%
45
−33.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6 no data
Battlefield 5 14−16 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 no data
Far Cry 5 12−14 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16 no data
Forza Horizon 4 24−27 no data
Hitman 3 10−11 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30 no data
Metro Exodus 12−14 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 24−27 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6 no data
Battlefield 5 14−16 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 no data
Far Cry 5 12−14 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16 no data
Forza Horizon 4 24−27 no data
Hitman 3 10−11 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30 no data
Metro Exodus 12−14 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 24−27 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 no data
Far Cry 5 12−14 no data
Forza Horizon 4 24−27 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 24−27 no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16 no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 no data
Far Cry 5 8−9 no data
Forza Horizon 4 9−10 no data
Hitman 3 10−11 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14 no data
Metro Exodus 4−5 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11 no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5 no data
Hitman 3 2−3 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data
Far Cry 5 3−4 no data
Forza Horizon 4 5−6 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7 no data
Metro Exodus 7−8 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 no data

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7 no data

This is how FirePro M6100 and K3000M compete in popular games:

  • FirePro M6100 is 21% faster in 900p
  • FirePro M6100 is 33% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.49 4.24
Recency 1 October 2013 1 June 2012

The FirePro M6100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K3000M in performance tests.


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 M6100
FirePro M6100
NVIDIA Quadro K3000M
Quadro K3000M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.7 139 votes

Rate FirePro M6100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 63 votes

Rate Quadro K3000M 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.