Radeon 760M vs Quadro M3000M

Place in the ranking	358	356
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	13.49	68.26
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GM204	Hawx Point
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	18 August 2015 (9 years ago)	6 December 2023 (1 year 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 cores	1,024	512
Core clock speed	1050 MHz	800 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2599 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	67.20	83.17
Floating-point processing power	2.15 TFLOPS	5.323 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	64	32
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	8

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	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	256 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	160 GB/s	no 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 Connectors	No outputs	Portable Device Dependent
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 compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.8
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.1
Vulkan	+	1.3
CUDA	5.2	-

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.

M3000M 14.66

Radeon 760M 14.84
+1.2%

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.

M3000M 5638

Radeon 760M 5707
+1.2%

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.

M3000M 8289

Radeon 760M 9603
+15.9%

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.

M3000M 27405

Radeon 760M 32985
+20.4%

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.

M3000M 6537
+6.4%

Radeon 760M 6142

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.

M3000M 44603
+6.8%

Radeon 760M 41767

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 +93.5%	31 −93.5%
1440p	18−20 −5.6%	19 +5.6%
4K	32 +6.7%	30−35 −6.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +4%	25 −4%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −3.4%	30 +3.4%
Elden Ring	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +36.8%	19 −36.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +142%	12 −142%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +15.7%	51 −15.7%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Valorant	55−60 −1.7%	55−60 +1.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +44.4%	18 −44.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +222%	9 −222%
Dota 2	33 +43.5%	23 −43.5%
Elden Ring	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +86.2%	29 −86.2%
Fortnite	80−85 −1.2%	80−85 +1.2%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +34.1%	44 −34.1%
Grand Theft Auto V	49 +44.1%	34 −44.1%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 −0.9%	100−110 +0.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Valorant	55−60 −1.7%	55−60 +1.7%
World of Tanks	190−200 −0.5%	190−200 +0.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Dota 2	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 −1.9%	55−60 +1.9%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +59.5%	37 −59.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 −0.9%	100−110 +0.9%
Valorant	55−60 −1.7%	55−60 +1.7%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Elden Ring	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130 −2.3%	130−140 +2.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
World of Tanks	100−110 −1%	100−110 +1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −2.9%	35−40 +2.9%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Valorant	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	35 +34.6%	24−27 −34.6%
Elden Ring	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	35 +34.6%	24−27 −34.6%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 −2.3%	40−45 +2.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35 +34.6%	24−27 −34.6%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Dota 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −5.6%	18−20 +5.6%
Fortnite	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −5%	21−24 +5%
Valorant	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

This is how M3000M and Radeon 760M compete in popular games:

M3000M is 94% faster in 1080p
Radeon 760M is 6% faster in 1440p
M3000M is 7% faster in 4K

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

in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the M3000M is 222% faster.
in Far Cry 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 760M is 6% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

M3000M is ahead in 14 tests (22%)
Radeon 760M is ahead in 15 tests (24%)
there's a draw in 34 tests (54%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	14.66	14.84
Recency	18 August 2015	6 December 2023
Chip lithography	28 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	15 Watt

Radeon 760M has a 1.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 600% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro M3000M and Radeon 760M.

Be aware that Quadro M3000M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon 760M is a mobile workstation one.

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