Radeon Pro 570 vs Quadro K3100M

Place in the ranking	599	335
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.27	no data
Power efficiency	5.40	9.45
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	GK104	Polaris 20
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	23 July 2013 (11 years ago)	5 June 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,999	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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	768	1792
Core clock speed	706 MHz	1000 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1105 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	120 Watt
Texture fill rate	45.18	123.8
Floating-point processing power	1.084 TFLOPS	3.96 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64	112

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	large	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	1695 MHz
Memory bandwidth	102.4 GB/s	217.0 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	No outputs
Display Port	1.2	no 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

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	+	1.2.131
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 5.62

Pro 570 15.73
+180%

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 2265

Pro 570 6336
+180%

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 6066

Pro 570 27597
+355%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

K3100M 3389

Pro 570 31844
+840%

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	33 −173%	90−95 +173%
4K	16 −150%	40−45 +150%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	60.58	no data
4K	124.94	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −178%	50−55 +178%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −171%	65−70 +171%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Metro Exodus	14−16 −167%	40−45 +167%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%
Valorant	18−20 −163%	50−55 +163%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −178%	50−55 +178%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Dota 2	20−22 −175%	55−60 +175%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −178%	75−80 +178%
Fortnite	35−40 −171%	95−100 +171%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −171%	65−70 +171%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 −175%	55−60 +175%
Metro Exodus	14−16 −167%	40−45 +167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 −165%	130−140 +165%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18 −178%	50−55 +178%
Valorant	18−20 −163%	50−55 +163%
World of Tanks	90−95 −177%	260−270 +177%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −178%	50−55 +178%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Dota 2	20−22 −175%	55−60 +175%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −178%	75−80 +178%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −171%	65−70 +171%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 −165%	130−140 +165%
Valorant	18−20 −163%	50−55 +163%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	6−7 −167%	16−18 +167%
Grand Theft Auto V	6−7 −167%	16−18 +167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −178%	100−105 +178%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
World of Tanks	40−45 −162%	110−120 +162%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 −170%	27−30 +170%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 −170%	27−30 +170%
Forza Horizon 5	8−9 −163%	21−24 +163%
Metro Exodus	7−8 −157%	18−20 +157%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −167%	24−27 +167%
Valorant	16−18 −150%	40−45 +150%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −170%	27−30 +170%
Dota 2	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −170%	27−30 +170%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Dota 2	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −157%	18−20 +157%
Fortnite	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −167%	16−18 +167%
Forza Horizon 5	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Valorant	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%

This is how K3100M and Pro 570 compete in popular games:

Pro 570 is 173% faster in 1080p
Pro 570 is 150% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.62	15.73
Recency	23 July 2013	5 June 2017
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	120 Watt

K3100M has 60% lower power consumption.

Pro 570, on the other hand, has a 179.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro 570 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K3100M in performance tests.

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