Quadro M1000M vs Quadro GP100

Place in the ranking	114	538
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	4.28
Power efficiency	11.57	12.74
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code name	GP100	GM107
Market segment	Workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	1 October 2016 (8 years ago)	18 August 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$200.89

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 cores	3584	512
Core clock speed	1304 MHz	993 MHz
Boost clock speed	1442 MHz	1072 MHz
Number of transistors	15,300 million	1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	235 Watt	40 Watt
Texture fill rate	323.0	31.78
Floating-point processing power	10.34 TFLOPS	1.017 TFLOPS
ROPs	96	16
TMUs	224	32

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	no data	large
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-A (3.0)
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	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	HBM2	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	16 GB	2 GB/4 GB
Memory bus width	4096 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	715 MHz	1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth	732.2 GB/s	80 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort	No outputs
Display Port	no data	1.2

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus	-	+
3D Vision Pro	no data	+
Mosaic	no data	+
nView Display Management	no data	+
Optimus	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	+
CUDA	6.0	5.0

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 GP100 39.42
+433%

M1000M 7.39

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.

Quadro GP100 15149
+433%

M1000M 2841

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro GP100 88540
+934%

M1000M 8562

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Quadro GP100 92763
+995%

M1000M 8471

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	200−210 +413%	39 −413%
4K	85−90 +431%	16 −431%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	5.15
4K	no data	12.56

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Valorant	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Dota 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Fortnite	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Valorant	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
World of Tanks	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Dota 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Valorant	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
World of Tanks	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Valorant	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Fortnite	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Valorant	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

This is how Quadro GP100 and M1000M compete in popular games:

Quadro GP100 is 413% faster in 1080p
Quadro GP100 is 431% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	39.42	7.39
Recency	1 October 2016	18 August 2015
Maximum RAM amount	16 GB	2 GB/4 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	235 Watt	40 Watt

Quadro GP100 has a 433.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

M1000M, on the other hand, has 487.5% lower power consumption.

The Quadro GP100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M1000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro GP100 is a workstation card while Quadro M1000M is a mobile workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.