Quadro 1000M vs Quadro P3000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P3000 Mobile and Quadro 1000M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

P3000 Mobile
2017
6 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
16.87
+1048%

P3000 Mobile outperforms 1000M by a whopping 1048% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking324988
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.18
Power efficiency15.472.25
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGP104GF108
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date11 January 2017 (8 years ago)13 January 2011 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$174.95

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores128096
Core clock speed1088 MHz700 MHz
Boost clock speed1215 MHzno data
Number of transistors7,200 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate97.2011.20
Floating-point processing power3.11 TFLOPS0.2688 TFLOPS
ROPs484
TMUs8016

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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-A (3.0)

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount6 GB2 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1753 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth168 GB/s28.8 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 Port1.4no 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 Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA6.12.1

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.

P3000 Mobile 16.87
+1048%
Quadro 1000M 1.47

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.

P3000 Mobile 6486
+1048%
Quadro 1000M 565

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.

P3000 Mobile 12105
+1184%
Quadro 1000M 943

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.

P3000 Mobile 33390
+631%
Quadro 1000M 4566

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 HD65
+51.2%
43
−51.2%
4K31
+1450%
2−3
−1450%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.07
4Kno data87.48

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+233%
9−10
−233%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+725%
4−5
−725%
Elden Ring 50−55
+5100%
1−2
−5100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+2600%
2−3
−2600%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+233%
9−10
−233%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+725%
4−5
−725%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+667%
9−10
−667%
Metro Exodus 45−50 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+471%
7−8
−471%
Valorant 65−70
+1260%
5−6
−1260%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+2600%
2−3
−2600%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+233%
9−10
−233%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+725%
4−5
−725%
Dota 2 60−65
+2900%
2−3
−2900%
Elden Ring 50−55
+5100%
1−2
−5100%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+445%
10−12
−445%
Fortnite 90−95
+1433%
6−7
−1433%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+667%
9−10
−667%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
+2900%
2−3
−2900%
Metro Exodus 45−50 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+638%
16−18
−638%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+471%
7−8
−471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+643%
7−8
−643%
Valorant 65−70
+1260%
5−6
−1260%
World of Tanks 200−210
+574%
30−35
−574%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+2600%
2−3
−2600%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+233%
9−10
−233%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+725%
4−5
−725%
Dota 2 60−65
+2900%
2−3
−2900%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+445%
10−12
−445%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+667%
9−10
−667%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+638%
16−18
−638%
Valorant 65−70
+1260%
5−6
−1260%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Elden Ring 27−30 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+1644%
9−10
−1644%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16 0−1
World of Tanks 110−120
+1200%
9−10
−1200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+1600%
2−3
−1600%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+760%
5−6
−760%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+1300%
3−4
−1300%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+1167%
3−4
−1167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+633%
3−4
−633%
Valorant 40−45
+514%
7−8
−514%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Dota 2 27−30
+81.3%
16−18
−81.3%
Elden Ring 12−14 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+93.3%
14−16
−93.3%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+1150%
4−5
−1150%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+93.3%
14−16
−93.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Dota 2 27−30
+81.3%
16−18
−81.3%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Fortnite 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+1100%
2−3
−1100%
Valorant 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%

This is how P3000 Mobile and Quadro 1000M compete in popular games:

  • P3000 Mobile is 51% faster in 1080p
  • P3000 Mobile is 1450% faster in 4K

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

  • in Elden Ring, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the P3000 Mobile is 5100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, P3000 Mobile surpassed Quadro 1000M in all 44 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.87 1.47
Recency 11 January 2017 13 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 45 Watt

P3000 Mobile has a 1047.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro 1000M, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 1000M 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 P3000 Mobile
Quadro P3000 Mobile
NVIDIA Quadro 1000M
Quadro 1000M

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.


3.9 161 vote

Rate Quadro P3000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 123 votes

Rate Quadro 1000M 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.