RTX A1000 Mobile vs Quadro K1000M

Place in performance ranking	841	223
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.15	no data
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Ampere (2020−2022)
GPU code name	N14P-Q1	GA107
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	1 June 2012 (11 years ago)	30 March 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$119.90	no data
Current price	$232 (1.9x MSRP)	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	192	2048
Core clock speed	850 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	no data	1140 MHz
Number of transistors	1,270 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	95 Watt (35 - 95 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate	13.60	72.96
Floating-point performance	326.4 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro K1000M and RTX A1000 Mobile compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	medium sized	medium sized
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x8

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1800 MHz	14000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	28.8 GB/s	176.0 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

No outputs

Portable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	+	1.3
CUDA	+	8.6

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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

RTX A1000 Mobile 23.07
+1042%

RTX A1000 Mobile outperforms Quadro K1000M by 1042% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

K1000M 5165

RTX A1000 Mobile 58312
+1029%

RTX A1000 Mobile outperforms Quadro K1000M by 1029% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

K1000M 1102

RTX A1000 Mobile 15135
+1273%

RTX A1000 Mobile outperforms Quadro K1000M by 1273% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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:

900p	9 −1011%	100−110 +1011%
Full HD	18 −278%	68 +278%
1440p	2−3 −1250%	27 +1250%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

−1425%

61
+1425%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −2200%	45−50 +2200%
Battlefield 5	3−4 −2433%	75−80 +2433%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 −445%	60−65 +445%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −1150%	50 +1150%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −4150%	85 +4150%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −6000%	60−65 +6000%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −1850%	75−80 +1850%
Hitman 3	3−4 −2700%	84 +2700%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −2167%	68 +2167%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −660%	35−40 +660%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −525%	50−55 +525%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −2200%	45−50 +2200%
Battlefield 5	3−4 −2433%	75−80 +2433%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 −445%	60−65 +445%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −825%	37 +825%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −3850%	79 +3850%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −6000%	60−65 +6000%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −1850%	75−80 +1850%
Hitman 3	3−4 −2200%	69 +2200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −1667%	53 +1667%
Metro Exodus	3−4 −1267%	41 +1267%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −660%	35−40 +660%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −525%	50−55 +525%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −1600%	85 +1600%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −2200%	45−50 +2200%
Battlefield 5	3−4 −2433%	75−80 +2433%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −625%	29 +625%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −3550%	73 +3550%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −6000%	60−65 +6000%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −1850%	75−80 +1850%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −760%	43 +760%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −775%	35−40 +775%
Hitman 3	5−6 −720%	41 +720%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 −322%	38 +322%
Metro Exodus	0−1	24
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −1600%	16−18 +1600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −1200%	35−40 +1200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Hitman 3	2−3 −1000%	21−24 +1000%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 −114%	14−16 +114%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	12−14
Far Cry 5	3−4 −533%	18−20 +533%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −340%	21−24 +340%

This is how K1000M and RTX A1000 Mobile compete in popular games:

RTX A1000 Mobile is 1011% faster than K1000M in 900p
RTX A1000 Mobile is 278% faster than K1000M in 1080p
RTX A1000 Mobile is 1250% faster than K1000M in 1440p

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

in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RTX A1000 Mobile is 6000% faster than the K1000M.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, RTX A1000 Mobile surpassed K1000M in all 47 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.02	23.07
Recency	1 June 2012	30 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	95 Watt