Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile vs FirePro S10000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro S10000 with Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

S10000
2012, $3,599
6 GB GDDR5, 750 Watt
10.85

RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms S10000 by a whopping 123% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking467262
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.25no data
Power efficiency2.2323.28
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameTahitiTU106
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date12 November 2012 (13 years ago)27 May 2019 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,599 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores4096 ×22304
Core clock speed825 MHz945 MHz
Boost clock speed950 MHz1380 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)750 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rate106.4 ×2198.7
Floating-point processing power3.405 TFLOPS ×26.359 TFLOPS
ROPs32 ×264
TMUs112 ×2144
Tensor Coresno data288
Ray Tracing Coresno data36
L1 Cache448 KB2.3 MB
L2 Cache768 KB4 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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length305 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount6 GB ×26 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit ×2256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth480 GB/s ×2448.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
G-SYNC support-+
Dual-link DVI support+-

Supported technologies

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

VR Readyno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA-7.5
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.

S10000 10.85
RTX 3000 Mobile 24.19
+123%

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.

S10000 4537
Samples: 8
RTX 3000 Mobile 10116
+123%

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 HD40−45
−138%
95
+138%
4K35−40
−151%
88
+151%

Cost per frame, $

1080p89.98no data
4K102.83no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 132
+0%
132
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 109
+0%
109
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 121
+0%
121
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 56
+0%
56
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 88
+0%
88
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

This is how S10000 and RTX 3000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 138% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 151% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.85 24.19
Recency 12 November 2012 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 750 Watt 80 Watt

RTX 3000 Mobile has a 123% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 133% more advanced lithography process, and 838% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro S10000 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro S10000 is a workstation graphics card while Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

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 40 votes

Rate FirePro S10000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 444 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro S10000 or Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.