Quadro FX 3000 vs NVS 310

Place in the ranking	1236	1479
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.02	no data
Power efficiency	2.61	no data
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code name	GF119	NV35
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	26 June 2012 (13 years ago)	22 July 2003 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$159	$203

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

NVS 310 and FX 3000 have a nearly equal value for money.

Performance to price scatter graph

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	48	no data
Core clock speed	523 MHz	400 MHz
Number of transistors	292 million	135 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	4.184	3.200
Floating-point processing power	0.1004 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	4	4
TMUs	8	8
L1 Cache	64 KB	no data
L2 Cache	128 KB	no data

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	AGP 8x
Length	156 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 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 type	DDR3	DDR
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	256 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	875 MHz	425 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14 GB/s	27.2 GB/s

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

2x DisplayPort

2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API and SDK support

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	9.0a
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.6	1.5 (2.1)
OpenCL	1.1	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	2.1	-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

NVS 310 0.68
+325%

FX 3000 0.16

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.

NVS 310 283
+310%

Samples: 410

FX 3000 69
Samples: 14

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.68	0.16
Recency	26 June 2012	22 July 2003
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	256 MB
Chip lithography	40 nm	130 nm

NVS 310 has a 325% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 225% more advanced lithography process.

The NVS 310 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3000 in performance tests.