GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB vs Quadro K1000M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K1000M with GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB, including specs and performance data.

K1000M
2012
2 GB DDR3, 45 Watt
2.02

GTX 1050 3 GB outperforms K1000M by a whopping 555% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking894387
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.50no data
Power efficiency3.0912.17
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGK107GP107
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date1 June 2012 (12 years ago)21 May 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$119.90 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 cores192768
Core clock speed850 MHz1392 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1518 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate13.6072.86
Floating-point processing power0.3264 TFLOPS2.332 TFLOPS
ROPs1624
TMUs1648

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Widthno data2-slot
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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB3 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1752 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/s84.1 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 outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA+6.1

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.

K1000M 2.02
GTX 1050 3 GB 13.24
+555%

  • Passmark

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.

K1000M 775
GTX 1050 3 GB 5089
+557%

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:

900p9
−511%
55−60
+511%
Full HD16
−525%
100−110
+525%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.49no data

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Elden Ring 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Battlefield 5 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−536%
70−75
+536%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%
Battlefield 5 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Dota 2 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Elden Ring 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−554%
85−90
+554%
Fortnite 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−536%
70−75
+536%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
−550%
130−140
+550%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−511%
55−60
+511%
World of Tanks 35−40
−541%
250−260
+541%
Battlefield 5 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Dota 2 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−554%
85−90
+554%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−536%
70−75
+536%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
−550%
130−140
+550%
Elden Ring 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−554%
85−90
+554%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
World of Tanks 12−14
−554%
85−90
+554%
Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−525%
200−210
+525%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Valorant 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%
Dota 2 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%
Elden Ring 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−533%
95−100
+533%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−533%
95−100
+533%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Dota 2 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Valorant 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%

This is how K1000M and GTX 1050 3 GB compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1050 3 GB is 511% faster in 900p
  • GTX 1050 3 GB is 525% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.02 13.24
Recency 1 June 2012 21 May 2018
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 3 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 75 Watt

K1000M has 66.7% lower power consumption.

GTX 1050 3 GB, on the other hand, has a 555.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K1000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K1000M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB is a desktop one.


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 K1000M
Quadro K1000M
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB
GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB

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.


3.6
88 votes

Rate Quadro K1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6
349 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB 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.