Quadro FX 3000 vs GeForce 930M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 930M with Quadro FX 3000, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 930M
2015
2 GB DDR3, 33 Watt
2.63
+1361%

930M outperforms FX 3000 by a whopping 1361% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8151404
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.46no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameGM108NV35
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date13 March 2015 (9 years ago)22 July 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$203

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores384no data
Core clock speed549 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed549 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data135 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Wattno data
Texture fill rate13.183.200
Floating-point processing power0.4216 TFLOPSno data
ROPs84
TMUs248

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 supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8AGP 8x
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x Molex

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 typeDDR3DDR
Maximum RAM amount2 GB256 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz425 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/s27.2 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent2x DVI, 1x S-Video

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boost2.0no data
Optimus+-
GameWorks+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)9.0a
Shader Model6.7 (5.1)no data
OpenGL4.51.5 (2.1)
OpenCL3.0N/A
Vulkan1.3N/A
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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.

GeForce 930M 2.63
+1361%
FX 3000 0.18

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.

GeForce 930M 1013
+1368%
FX 3000 69

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 HD18
+1700%
1−2
−1700%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data203.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 12−14 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 13 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+1800%
2−3
−1800%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 12−14 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+1800%
2−3
−1800%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 12−14 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+1800%
2−3
−1800%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Hitman 3 8−9 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1

This is how GeForce 930M and FX 3000 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce 930M is 1700% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.63 0.18
Recency 13 March 2015 22 July 2003
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 130 nm

GeForce 930M has a 1361.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce 930M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3000 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 930M is a notebook card while Quadro FX 3000 is a workstation 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.


NVIDIA GeForce 930M
GeForce 930M
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3000
Quadro FX 3000

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.


3 265 votes

Rate GeForce 930M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 8 votes

Rate Quadro FX 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.