HD Graphics 4000 vs Quadro K3100M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K3100M with HD Graphics 4000, including specs and performance data.

K3100M
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
5.87
+397%

K3100M outperforms HD Graphics 4000 by a whopping 397% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5871060
Place by popularitynot in top-10042
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.23no data
Power efficiency5.441.82
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 7.0 (2012−2013)
GPU code nameGK104Ivy Bridge GT2
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)14 May 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,999 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 cores768128
Core clock speed706 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1000 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million1,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm22 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Wattunknown
Texture fill rate45.1816.00
Floating-point processing power1.084 TFLOPS0.256 TFLOPS
ROPs322
TMUs6416

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
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)Ring Bus
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed800 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth102.4 GB/sno data
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 outputsPortable Device Dependent
Display Port1.2no data

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
Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX1211.1 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.54.0
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan++
CUDA+-

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.

K3100M 5.87
+397%
HD Graphics 4000 1.18

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 2264
+399%
HD Graphics 4000 454

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.

K3100M 3581
+585%
HD Graphics 4000 523

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.

K3100M 15120
+411%
HD Graphics 4000 2959

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
+483%
HD Graphics 4000 480

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

K3100M 18389
+388%
HD Graphics 4000 3769

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

K3100M 36
+388%
HD Graphics 4000 7

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:

900p55−60
+358%
12
−358%
Full HD32
+191%
11
−191%
4K15
+400%
3−4
−400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+3700%
1−2
−3700%
Hitman 3 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+157%
14−16
−157%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+150%
8−9
−150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+53.1%
30−35
−53.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+3700%
1−2
−3700%
Hitman 3 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+157%
14−16
−157%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+150%
8−9
−150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+254%
13
−254%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+53.1%
30−35
−53.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+3700%
1−2
−3700%
Hitman 3 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+157%
14−16
−157%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+150%
8−9
−150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+53.1%
30−35
−53.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Hitman 3 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Metro Exodus 4−5 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+640%
5−6
−640%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5 0−1
Hitman 3 2−3 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
+400%
1−2
−400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

This is how K3100M and HD Graphics 4000 compete in popular games:

  • K3100M is 358% faster in 900p
  • K3100M is 191% faster in 1080p
  • K3100M is 400% faster in 4K

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the K3100M is 3700% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD Graphics 4000 is 57% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • K3100M is ahead in 46 tests (98%)
  • HD Graphics 4000 is ahead in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.87 1.18
Recency 23 July 2013 14 May 2012
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm

K3100M has a 397.5% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

HD Graphics 4000, on the other hand, has a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro K3100M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K3100M is a mobile workstation card while HD Graphics 4000 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 K3100M
Quadro K3100M
Intel HD Graphics 4000
HD Graphics 4000

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4 125 votes

Rate Quadro K3100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 5171 vote

Rate HD Graphics 4000 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.