Quadro T1000 Max-Q vs M3000M

Place in performance ranking	339	290
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Value for money	2.27	no data
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2018)	Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code name	GM204	N19P-Q1
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	2 October 2015 (8 years ago)	27 May 2019 (4 years ago)
Current price	$981	no data

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Technical specs

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 cores	1,024	768
Core clock speed	1050 MHz	795 / 1230 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1455 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	35 - 40 Watt
Texture fill rate	67.20	75.60
Floating-point performance	2,150 gflops	no data

Size and compatibility

Information on Quadro M3000M and Quadro T1000 Max-Q 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 size	large	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

Memory

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	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	5000 MHz	8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160 GB/s	80 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Video outputs and ports

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

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 support

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

DirectX	12	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.0	6.6
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	+	1.2
CUDA	5.2	7.5

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 14.27

T1000 Max-Q 17.36
+21.7%

T1000 Max-Q outperforms M3000M by 22% based on our aggregated 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

T1000 Max-Q 6723
+21.7%

T1000 Max-Q outperforms M3000M by 22% in Passmark.

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	60 −16.7%	70−75 +16.7%
4K	25 −20%	30−35 +20%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

21−24

−22.7%

27−30
+22.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−33 −20%	35−40 +20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24−27 −25%	30−33 +25%
Battlefield 5	45−50 −20.4%	55−60 +20.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 −21.6%	45−50 +21.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 −22.7%	27−30 +22.7%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −24.3%	45−50 +24.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 −20.5%	45−50 +20.5%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −22%	60−65 +22%
Hitman 3	35−40 −25.6%	45−50 +25.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−33 −23.3%	35−40 +23.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −20.8%	27−30 +20.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 −23.3%	35−40 +23.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −22.2%	30−35 +22.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−33 −20%	35−40 +20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24−27 −25%	30−33 +25%
Battlefield 5	45−50 −20.4%	55−60 +20.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 −21.6%	45−50 +21.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 −22.7%	27−30 +22.7%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −24.3%	45−50 +24.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 −20.5%	45−50 +20.5%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −22%	60−65 +22%
Hitman 3	35−40 −25.6%	45−50 +25.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−33 −23.3%	35−40 +23.3%
Metro Exodus	21−24 −22.7%	27−30 +22.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −20.8%	27−30 +20.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 −23.3%	35−40 +23.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	42 +13.5%	35−40 −13.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −22.2%	30−35 +22.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−33 −20%	35−40 +20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24−27 −25%	30−33 +25%
Battlefield 5	45−50 −20.4%	55−60 +20.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 −22.7%	27−30 +22.7%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −24.3%	45−50 +24.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 −20.5%	45−50 +20.5%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −22%	60−65 +22%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	22 −68.2%	35−40 +68.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −22.2%	30−35 +22.2%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 −23.8%	24−27 +23.8%
Hitman 3	21−24 −27.3%	27−30 +27.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 −15%	21−24 +15%
Metro Exodus	12−14 −23.1%	16−18 +23.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −30%	12−14 +30%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 −22.2%	21−24 +22.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−12 −36.4%	14−16 +36.4%
Battlefield 5	27−30 −31%	35−40 +31%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −26.1%	27−30 +26.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 −26.9%	30−35 +26.9%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −25%	35−40 +25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −28.6%	18−20 +28.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 −22.2%	10−12 +22.2%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Hitman 3	12−14 −23.1%	16−18 +23.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −10%	10−12 +10%
Metro Exodus	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −37.5%	10−12 +37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Battlefield 5	14−16 −26.7%	18−20 +26.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −20%	24−27 +20%
Watch Dogs: Legion	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%

This is how M3000M and T1000 Max-Q compete in popular games:

T1000 Max-Q is 16.7% faster than M3000M in 1080p
T1000 Max-Q is 20% faster than M3000M in 4K

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

in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the M3000M is 13.5% faster than the T1000 Max-Q.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the T1000 Max-Q is 68.2% faster than the M3000M.

All in all, in popular games: