NVS 3100M vs Quadro M3000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M3000M and NVS 3100M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

M3000M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
14.31
+2600%

M3000M outperforms NVS 3100M by a whopping 2600% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking3431187
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.44no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)GT2xx (2009−2012)
GPU code nameGM204N10M-NS
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date2 October 2015 (8 years ago)7 January 2010 (14 years ago)
Current price$981 $269

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

M3000M and NVS 3100M have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores1,02416
Core clock speed1050 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt14 Watt
Texture fill rate67.204.848
Floating-point performance2,150 gflops46.98 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro M3000M and NVS 3100M 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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
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 typeGDDR5GDDR3, DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed5000 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s12.64 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 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+no data
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1211.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.04.1
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA5.21.2

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.

M3000M 14.31
+2600%
NVS 3100M 0.53

Quadro M3000M outperforms NVS 3100M by 2600% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

M3000M 5526
+2609%
NVS 3100M 204

Quadro M3000M outperforms NVS 3100M by 2609% in Passmark.

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%

M3000M 27405
+2346%
NVS 3100M 1121

Quadro M3000M outperforms NVS 3100M by 2346% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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 HD57
+2750%
2−3
−2750%
4K230−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 600−650
+2509%
21−24
−2509%
Battlefield 5 1200−1250
+2509%
45−50
−2509%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data
Far Cry 5 850−900
+2476%
30−35
−2476%
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 no data
Forza Horizon 4 1800−1850
+2547%
65−70
−2547%
Hitman 3 0−1 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 no data
Metro Exodus 1250−1300
+2560%
45−50
−2560%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1050−1100
+2525%
40−45
−2525%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 600−650
+2509%
21−24
−2509%
Battlefield 5 1200−1250
+2509%
45−50
−2509%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data
Far Cry 5 850−900
+2476%
30−35
−2476%
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 no data
Forza Horizon 4 1800−1850
+2547%
65−70
−2547%
Hitman 3 0−1 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 no data
Metro Exodus 1250−1300
+2560%
45−50
−2560%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1050−1100
+2525%
40−45
−2525%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 600−650
+2509%
21−24
−2509%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data
Far Cry 5 850−900
+2476%
30−35
−2476%
Forza Horizon 4 1800−1850
+2547%
65−70
−2547%
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1050−1100
+2525%
40−45
−2525%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 750−800
+2579%
27−30
−2579%
Far Cry New Dawn 700−750
+2592%
24−27
−2592%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 350−400
+2400%
14−16
−2400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 290−300
+2536%
10−12
−2536%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data
Far Cry 5 0−1 no data
Forza Horizon 4 700−750
+2493%
27−30
−2493%
Hitman 3 0−1 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 no data
Metro Exodus 650−700
+2500%
24−27
−2500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 650−700
+2500%
24−27
−2500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 400−450
+2567%
14−16
−2567%
Watch Dogs: Legion 240−250
+2567%
9−10
−2567%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 350−400
+2400%
14−16
−2400%
Far Cry New Dawn 270−280
+2600%
10−11
−2600%
Hitman 3 270−280
+2600%
10−11
−2600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 240−250
+2567%
9−10
−2567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 350−400
+2400%
14
−2400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 180−190
+2471%
7−8
−2471%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 180−190
+2471%
7−8
−2471%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+2400%
2−3
−2400%
Far Cry 5 210−220
+2525%
8−9
−2525%
Forza Horizon 4 500−550
+2532%
18−20
−2532%
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 no data
Metro Exodus 0−1 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+2500%
5−6
−2500%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 no data

This is how M3000M and NVS 3100M compete in popular games:

  • M3000M is 2750% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.31 0.53
Recency 2 October 2015 7 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 14 Watt

The Quadro M3000M is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 3100M in performance tests.


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 M3000M
Quadro M3000M
NVIDIA NVS 3100M
NVS 3100M

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.


3.9 315 votes

Rate Quadro M3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 126 votes

Rate NVS 3100M 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.