GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition vs Quadro M3000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M3000M with GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition, including specs and performance data.

M3000M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
13.32
+335%

M3000M outperforms 775M Mac Edition by a whopping 335% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking411802
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.642.35
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGM204GK104
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date18 August 2015 (10 years ago)8 November 2013 (12 years ago)

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 cores1,0241344
Core clock speed1050 MHz797 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate67.2089.26
Floating-point processing power2.15 TFLOPS2.142 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs64112
L1 Cache384 KB112 KB
L2 Cache2 MB512 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
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s160.0 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 outputsNo outputs
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

API and SDK support

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

DirectX1212 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.1.126
CUDA5.23.0

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 HD60
+400%
12−14
−400%
4K25
+400%
5−6
−400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+369%
16−18
−369%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 55−60
+392%
12−14
−392%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+369%
16−18
−369%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%
Escape from Tarkov 55−60
+358%
12−14
−358%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+340%
10−11
−340%
Fortnite 75−80
+388%
16−18
−388%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+375%
12−14
−375%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+367%
9−10
−367%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+390%
10−11
−390%
Valorant 110−120
+379%
24−27
−379%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 55−60
+392%
12−14
−392%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+369%
16−18
−369%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190
+368%
40−45
−368%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%
Dota 2 85−90
+389%
18−20
−389%
Escape from Tarkov 55−60
+358%
12−14
−358%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+340%
10−11
−340%
Fortnite 75−80
+388%
16−18
−388%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+375%
12−14
−375%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+367%
9−10
−367%
Grand Theft Auto V 49
+390%
10−11
−390%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+390%
10−11
−390%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 42
+367%
9−10
−367%
Valorant 110−120
+379%
24−27
−379%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60
+392%
12−14
−392%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%
Dota 2 85−90
+389%
18−20
−389%
Escape from Tarkov 55−60
+358%
12−14
−358%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+340%
10−11
−340%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+375%
12−14
−375%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+390%
10−11
−390%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+340%
5−6
−340%
Valorant 110−120
+379%
24−27
−379%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 75−80
+388%
16−18
−388%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+420%
5−6
−420%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+381%
21−24
−381%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+425%
4−5
−425%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+348%
27−30
−348%
Valorant 140−150
+370%
30−33
−370%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+363%
8−9
−363%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Escape from Tarkov 27−30
+350%
6−7
−350%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+383%
6−7
−383%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+371%
7−8
−371%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+375%
4−5
−375%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 30−33
+400%
6−7
−400%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Grand Theft Auto V 35
+338%
8−9
−338%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+367%
3−4
−367%
Valorant 70−75
+363%
16−18
−363%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+375%
4−5
−375%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Dota 2 45−50
+390%
10−11
−390%
Escape from Tarkov 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%

This is how M3000M and GTX 775M Mac Edition compete in popular games:

  • M3000M is 400% faster in 1080p
  • M3000M is 400% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.32 3.06
Recency 18 August 2015 8 November 2013
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 100 Watt

M3000M has a 335.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 33.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M3000M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M3000M is a mobile workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition is a mobile workstation 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 M3000M
Quadro M3000M
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition
GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition

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.


3.8 376 votes

Rate Quadro M3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 32 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M3000M or GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.