Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GeForce GTX 280M vs Quadro K1100M
Combined performance score
Quadro K1100M outperforms GeForce GTX 280M by 90% in our combined benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 754 | 932 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Value for money | 0.21 | 0.16 |
Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | G9x (2007−2010) |
GPU code name | GK107 | N10E-GTX |
Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
Release date | 23 July 2013 (10 years old) | 2 March 2009 (15 years old) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $109.94 | no data |
Current price | $350 (3.2x MSRP) | $140 |
K1100M has 31% better value for money than GTX 280M.
Technical specs
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 cores | 384 | 128 |
CUDA cores | no data | 128 |
Core clock speed | 705 MHz | 585 MHz |
Number of transistors | 1,270 million | 754 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 75 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 22.59 | 38 billion/sec |
Floating-point performance | 542.2 gflops | 374.5 gflops |
Gigaflops | no data | 562 |
Size and compatibility
Information on Quadro K1100M and GeForce GTX 280M 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 size | medium sized | large |
Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 |
Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | MXM-IV |
SLI options | no data | + |
MXM Type | no data | MXM 3.0 Type-B |
Memory
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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 2800 MHz | Up to 950 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 44.8 GB/s | 61 GB/s |
Shared memory | - | - |
Video outputs and ports
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 Connectors | No outputs | HDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIDisplayPortLVDSVGA |
HDMI | no data | + |
Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
Display Port | 1.2 | no data |
Audio input for HDMI | no data | S/PDIF |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
Optimus | + | no data |
Power management | no data | 8.0 |
3D Vision Pro | + | no data |
Mosaic | + | no data |
nView Display Management | + | no data |
Optimus | + | no data |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12 | 11.1 (10_0) |
Shader Model | 5 | 4.0 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 2.1 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
Vulkan | + | N/A |
CUDA | + | + |
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.
Quadro K1100M outperforms GeForce GTX 280M by 90% in our combined 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%
Quadro K1100M outperforms GeForce GTX 280M by 89% in Passmark.
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%
Quadro K1100M outperforms GeForce GTX 280M by 35% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.
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 HD | 18
+100%
| 9−10
−100%
|
Performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 4−5 | 0−1 |
Battlefield 5 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 12−14
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
Hitman 3 | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 4−5 | 0−1 |
Battlefield 5 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 12−14
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
Hitman 3 | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Metro Exodus | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 4−5 | 0−1 |
Battlefield 5 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 1−2 | 0−1 |
1440p
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
Hitman 3 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
4K
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
This is how K1100M and GTX 280M compete in popular games:
1080p resolution:
- K1100M is 100% faster than GTX 280M
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the K1100M is 600% faster than the GTX 280M.
All in all, in popular games:
- K1100M is ahead in 29 tests (91%)
- there's a draw in 3 tests (9%)
Advantages and disadvantages
Performance score | 2.81 | 1.48 |
Recency | 23 July 2013 | 2 March 2009 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
Chip lithography | 28 nm | 55 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 75 Watt |
The Quadro K1100M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 280M in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro K1100M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 280M is a mobile workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.