Quadro FX 3000 vs HD Graphics 2000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1221not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGen. 6 Sandy Bridge (2011)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameSandy BridgeNV35
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 February 2011 (13 years ago)22 July 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$203

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 cores6no data
Core clock speed850/1100 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million135 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknownno data
Texture fill rate8.1003.200
Floating-point processing power0.1296 gflopsno data
ROPs14
TMUs68

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16AGP 8x
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeSystem SharedDDR
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared256 MB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared850 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data27.2 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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)9.0a
Shader Model4.1no data
OpenGL3.11.5 (2.1)
OpenCLN/AN/A
VulkanN/AN/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


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.

HD Graphics 2000 213
+209%
FX 3000 69

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 February 2011 22 July 2003
Chip lithography 32 nm 130 nm

HD Graphics 2000 has an age advantage of 7 years, and a 306.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between HD Graphics 2000 and Quadro FX 3000. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that HD Graphics 2000 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.


Intel HD Graphics 2000
HD Graphics 2000
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.


2.7 1248 votes

Rate HD Graphics 2000 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.