GeForce GT 430 vs Quadro K3100M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K3100M with GeForce GT 430, including specs and performance data.

K3100M
2013, $1,999
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
5.49
+284%

K3100M outperforms GT 430 by a whopping 284% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6561036
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.110.05
Power efficiency5.632.24
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGK104GF108
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date23 July 2013 (12 years ago)11 October 2010 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,999 $79

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

K3100M has 120% better value for money than GT 430.

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores76896
CUDA cores per GPUno data96
Core clock speed706 MHz700 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt49 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data98 °C
Texture fill rate45.1811.20
Floating-point processing power1.084 TFLOPS0.2688 TFLOPS
ROPs324
TMUs6416
L1 Cache64 KB128 KB
L2 Cache512 KB128 KB

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0 x 16
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Heightno data2.713" (6.9 cm)
Widthno data1-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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz800 - 900 MHz (1600 - 1800 data rate)
Memory bandwidth102.4 GB/s25.6 - 28.8 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsHDMIVGA (optional)Mini HDMIDual Link DVI
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Display Port1.2no data
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

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 and SDK support

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

DirectX1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.2
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

K3100M 5.49
+284%
GT 430 1.43

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.

K3100M 2297
+284%
Samples: 772
GT 430 598
Samples: 3076

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

K3100M 2797
+288%
GT 430 720

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.

K3100M 6256
+182%
GT 430 2219

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

K3100M 19
+533%
GT 430 3

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 HD35
+289%
9−10
−289%
4K15
+400%
3−4
−400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p57.11
−551%
8.78
+551%
4K133.27
−406%
26.33
+406%
  • GT 430 has 551% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GT 430 has 406% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+333%
6−7
−333%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+333%
6−7
−333%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Fortnite 30−35
+560%
5−6
−560%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+213%
8−9
−213%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Valorant 65−70
+85.7%
35−40
−85.7%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+333%
6−7
−333%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
+191%
30−35
−191%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Dota 2 45−50
+156%
18−20
−156%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Fortnite 30−35
+560%
5−6
−560%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+213%
8−9
−213%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+100%
7−8
−100%
Valorant 65−70
+85.7%
35−40
−85.7%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Dota 2 45−50
+156%
18−20
−156%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+213%
8−9
−213%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+85.7%
35−40
−85.7%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 30−35
+560%
5−6
−560%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+320%
10−11
−320%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+147%
14−16
−147%
Valorant 60−65
+917%
6−7
−917%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2 0−1
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
+400%
1−2
−400%
Valorant 27−30
+300%
7−8
−300%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

This is how K3100M and GT 430 compete in popular games:

  • K3100M is 289% faster in 1080p
  • K3100M is 400% faster in 4K

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

  • in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the K3100M is 1800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • K3100M performs better in 49 tests (98%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.49 1.43
Recency 23 July 2013 11 October 2010
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 49 Watt

K3100M has a 283.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 430, on the other hand, has 53.1% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K3100M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 430 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K3100M is a mobile workstation graphics card while GeForce GT 430 is a desktop 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 K3100M
Quadro K3100M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 430
GeForce GT 430

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.


4 140 votes

Rate Quadro K3100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 1321 votes

Rate GeForce GT 430 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K3100M or GeForce GT 430, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.