GRID M3-3020 vs Quadro M620

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M620 with GRID M3-3020, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M620
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
7.21

GRID M3-3020 outperforms M620 by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking545527
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency16.57no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGM107GM107
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date11 January 2017 (8 years ago)18 May 2016 (8 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 cores512640
Core clock speed756 MHz1033 MHz
Boost clock speed977 MHz1306 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Wattno data
Texture fill rate31.2652.24
Floating-point processing power1 TFLOPS1.672 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs3240

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
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 8-pin

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 amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz1300 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s83.2 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+-
3D Stereo+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.

DirectX1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
CUDA5.05.0

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 HD29
−3.4%
30−35
+3.4%
4K12
+0%
12−14
+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Elden Ring 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
−4.3%
24−27
+4.3%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−3.4%
30−33
+3.4%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Valorant 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
−4.3%
24−27
+4.3%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Dota 2 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Elden Ring 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%
Fortnite 40−45
−4.7%
45−50
+4.7%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−3.4%
30−33
+3.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 38
−5.3%
40−45
+5.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Valorant 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
World of Tanks 110−120
+0.9%
110−120
−0.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
−4.3%
24−27
+4.3%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Dota 2 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−3.4%
30−33
+3.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
−3.4%
60−65
+3.4%
Valorant 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Elden Ring 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
−2.6%
40−45
+2.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
World of Tanks 50−55
−5.8%
55−60
+5.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Elden Ring 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16
+0%
16−18
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how Quadro M620 and GRID M3-3020 compete in popular games:

  • GRID M3-3020 is 3% faster in 1080p
  • A tie in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.21 7.69
Recency 11 January 2017 18 May 2016
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB

Quadro M620 has an age advantage of 7 months.

GRID M3-3020, on the other hand, has a 6.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro M620 and GRID M3-3020.

Be aware that Quadro M620 is a mobile workstation card while GRID M3-3020 is a workstation one.


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 M620
Quadro M620
NVIDIA GRID M3-3020
GRID M3-3020

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.


3.3 195 votes

Rate Quadro M620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate GRID M3-3020 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.