FirePro W4100 vs GRID M3-3020

GRID M3-3020 NVS 810 Quadro K620 Quadro K1200 Quadro K2200 Tesla M10
VS
FirePro W4000 FirePro W4100 FirePro W4130M FirePro W4150M FirePro W4300

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GRID M3-3020 and FirePro W4100, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GRID M3-3020
2016
4 GB GDDR5
7.69
+94.2%

GRID M3-3020 outperforms W4100 by an impressive 94% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GRID M3-3020 GRID M3-3020
FirePro W4100 FirePro W4100

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking526701
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data5.45
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGM107Cape Verde
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date18 May 2016 (8 years ago)13 August 2014 (10 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 cores640512
Core clock speed1033 MHz630 MHz
Boost clock speed1306 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data50 Watt
Texture fill rate52.2420.16
Floating-point processing power1.672 TFLOPS0.6451 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs4032

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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm171 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Form factorno datalow profile / half length
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone

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 amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1300 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth83.2 GB/s72 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 outputs4x mini-DisplayPort
Dual-link DVI support-+

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA5.0-

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 HD30−35
+76.5%
17
−76.5%
4K5−6
+66.7%
3
−66.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Elden Ring 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Elden Ring 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
World of Tanks 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Elden Ring 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
World of Tanks 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Valorant 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how GRID M3-3020 and FirePro W4100 compete in popular games:

  • GRID M3-3020 is 76% faster in 1080p
  • GRID M3-3020 is 67% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 7.69 3.96
Recency 18 May 2016 13 August 2014
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB

GRID M3-3020 has a 94.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The GRID M3-3020 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W4100 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.

NVIDIA GRID M3-3020
GRID M3-3020
AMD FirePro W4100
FirePro W4100
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

GRID M3-3020 GRID M3 3020
vs
FirePro W5000 FirePro W5000
FirePro W4100 FirePro W4100
vs
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
GRID M3-3020 GRID M3 3020
vs
FirePro W5100 FirePro W5100
Tesla M10 Tesla M10
vs
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile
RX Vega M GH Radeon RX Vega M GH
vs
GTX 1630 GeForce GTX 1630
RX Vega 11 Radeon RX Vega 11
vs
HD 6870 1600SP Edition Radeon HD 6870 1600SP Edition
GRID M10-8Q GRID M10 8Q
vs
GRID M60-2Q GRID M60 2Q
Quadro P620 Quadro P620
vs
RTX 6000 Mobile Quadro RTX 6000 Mobile
R7 350 Radeon R7 350
vs
HD 6530D IGP Radeon HD 6530D IGP
RX 550X Radeon RX 550X
vs
RTX 3060 12 GB GA104 GeForce RTX 3060 12 GB GA104
RX 550X Radeon RX 550X
vs
RTX 3060 GDDR6X GeForce RTX 3060 GDDR6X
Pro 555X Radeon Pro 555X
vs
Xbox One S GPU Xbox One S GPU
RTX 2080 Ti GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
vs
Jetson Xavier NX 16 GB Jetson Xavier NX 16 GB

Community ratings

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

5 1 vote

Rate GRID M3-3020 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 73 votes

Rate FirePro W4100 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.