ATI FirePro M7740 vs Quadro 3000M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 3000M and FirePro M7740, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro 3000M
2011
2 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
2.59
+21%

3000M outperforms ATI M7740 by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking822867
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.25no data
Power efficiency2.382.46
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGF104M97
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date22 February 2011 (13 years ago)4 August 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$398.96 no data

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 cores240640
Core clock speed450 MHz650 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million826 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate18.0020.80
Floating-point processing power0.432 TFLOPS0.832 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs4032

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 sizelargelarge
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed625 MHz846 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s54.14 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.1-

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.

Quadro 3000M 2.59
+21%
ATI M7740 2.14

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.

Quadro 3000M 7941
+19.8%
ATI M7740 6626

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 HD51
+27.5%
40−45
−27.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.82no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Elden Ring 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Dota 2 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Elden Ring 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Fortnite 14−16
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+14.3%
21−24
−14.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
World of Tanks 45−50
+14.6%
40−45
−14.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Dota 2 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+14.3%
21−24
−14.3%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
World of Tanks 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Valorant 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 1−2 0−1
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how Quadro 3000M and ATI M7740 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro 3000M is 28% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro 3000M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro 3000M is ahead in 34 tests (67%)
  • there's a draw in 17 tests (33%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.59 2.14
Recency 22 February 2011 4 August 2009
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 60 Watt

Quadro 3000M has a 21% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

ATI M7740, on the other hand, has 25% lower power consumption.

The Quadro 3000M is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M7740 in performance tests.


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 Quadro 3000M
Quadro 3000M
ATI FirePro M7740
FirePro M7740

Other comparisons

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.


3.8 49 votes

Rate Quadro 3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate FirePro M7740 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.