Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3670
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 3670 with Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, including specs and performance data.
RTX 3000 Max-Q outperforms Mobility HD 3670 by a whopping 3969% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1303 | 314 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.23 | 25.06 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Turing (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | M86 | TU106 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 7 January 2008 (18 years ago) | 27 May 2019 (6 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 cores | 120 | 2304 |
| Core clock speed | 680 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1215 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 378 million | 10,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 60 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 5.440 | 175.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1632 TFLOPS | 5.599 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 64 |
| TMUs | 8 | 144 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 288 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 36 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 2.3 MB |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 4 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 size | medium sized | large |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 type | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 448.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| G-SYNC support | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| VR Ready | no data | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | - | 7.5 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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 | 1−2
−7300%
| 74
+7300%
|
| 1440p | 1−2
−4400%
| 45
+4400%
|
| 4K | 0−1 | 30 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−4200%
|
40−45
+4200%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−4200%
|
40−45
+4200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1900%
|
80−85
+1900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−986%
|
75−80
+986%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−448%
|
140−150
+448%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 16−18
−1288%
|
230−240
+1288%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−4200%
|
40−45
+4200%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−12
−1045%
|
126
+1045%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1900%
|
80−85
+1900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 40−45 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−986%
|
75−80
+986%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−1840%
|
97
+1840%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−448%
|
140−150
+448%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−4200%
|
40−45
+4200%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−12
−991%
|
120
+991%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1900%
|
80−85
+1900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−986%
|
75−80
+986%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−940%
|
52
+940%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−281%
|
103
+281%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−1267%
|
40−45
+1267%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 2−3
−7100%
|
140−150
+7100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
−3340%
|
170−180
+3340%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−3000%
|
30−35
+3000%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 45−50 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−364%
|
65
+364%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−5600%
|
110−120
+5600%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−900%
|
20−22
+900%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−950%
|
21−24
+950%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 87
+0%
|
87
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 79
+0%
|
79
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 85
+0%
|
85
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 75
+0%
|
75
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 49
+0%
|
49
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Valorant | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 34
+0%
|
34
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 76
+0%
|
76
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 26
+0%
|
26
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
This is how ATI Mobility HD 3670 and RTX 3000 Max-Q compete in popular games:
- RTX 3000 Max-Q is 7300% faster in 1080p
- RTX 3000 Max-Q is 4400% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 3000 Max-Q is 7100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 3000 Max-Q performs better in 27 tests (47%)
- there's a draw in 31 tests (53%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.48 | 19.53 |
| Recency | 7 January 2008 | 27 May 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 6 GB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 60 Watt |
ATI Mobility HD 3670 has 100% lower power consumption.
RTX 3000 Max-Q, on the other hand, has a 3969% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 358% more advanced lithography process.
The Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 3670 in performance tests.
Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 3670 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q 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.
