GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile vs Quadro FX 3000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3000 with GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FX 3000
2003
256 MB DDR
0.18

RTX 3060 Mobile outperforms FX 3000 by a whopping 17994% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1414175
Place by popularitynot in top-10067
Power efficiencyno data27.99
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameNV35GA106
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date22 July 2003 (21 year ago)12 January 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$203 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 coresno data3840
Core clock speed400 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1425 MHz
Number of transistors135 million13,250 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data80 Watt
Texture fill rate3.200171.0
Floating-point processing powerno data10.94 TFLOPS
ROPs448
TMUs8120
Tensor Coresno data120
Ray Tracing Coresno data30

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 4.0 x16
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x Molexno data

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 typeDDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB6 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed425 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth27.2 GB/s336.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0a12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGL1.5 (2.1)4.6
OpenCLN/A2.0
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA-8.6
DLSS-+

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.

FX 3000 0.18
RTX 3060 Mobile 32.57
+17994%

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.

FX 3000 69
RTX 3060 Mobile 12550
+18088%

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 HD0−199
1440p-0−166
4K-0−143

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 174
+0%
174
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 103
+0%
103
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 131
+0%
131
+0%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 86
+0%
86
+0%
Far Cry 5 112
+0%
112
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 115
+0%
115
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 75
+0%
75
+0%
Battlefield 5 141
+0%
141
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 69
+0%
69
+0%
Dota 2 131
+0%
131
+0%
Far Cry 5 106
+0%
106
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 99
+0%
99
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 121
+0%
121
+0%
Metro Exodus 81
+0%
81
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 142
+0%
142
+0%
Valorant 189
+0%
189
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 131
+0%
131
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 61
+0%
61
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 62
+0%
62
+0%
Dota 2 124
+0%
124
+0%
Far Cry 5 101
+0%
101
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 81
+0%
81
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 78
+0%
78
+0%
Valorant 172
+0%
172
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 75
+0%
75
+0%
Metro Exodus 50
+0%
50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 304
+0%
304
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 104
+0%
104
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 39
+0%
39
+0%
Far Cry 5 84
+0%
84
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 63
+0%
63
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 73
+0%
73
+0%
Metro Exodus 31
+0%
31
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55
+0%
55
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 63
+0%
63
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 15
+0%
15
+0%
Dota 2 95
+0%
95
+0%
Far Cry 5 40
+0%
40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 34
+0%
34
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.18 32.57
Recency 22 July 2003 12 January 2021
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 8 nm

RTX 3060 Mobile has a 17994.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1525% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3000 is a workstation card while GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile is a notebook one.

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 FX 3000
Quadro FX 3000
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile
GeForce RTX 3060

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 8 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 5159 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 3000 or GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.