Quadro 3000M vs Radeon HD 8970M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8970M with Quadro 3000M, including specs and performance data.

HD 8970M
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
10.06
+290%

HD 8970M outperforms 3000M by a whopping 290% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking447821
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.24
Power efficiency6.912.36
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameNeptuneGF104
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date14 May 2013 (11 years ago)22 February 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$398.96

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 cores1280240
Core clock speed850 MHz450 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,800 million1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate72.0018.00
Floating-point processing power2.304 TFLOPS0.432 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs8040

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 sizelargelarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1200 MHz625 MHz
Memory bandwidth153.6 GB/s80 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-2.1

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.

HD 8970M 10.06
+290%
Quadro 3000M 2.58

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.

HD 8970M 3876
+290%
Quadro 3000M 995

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.

HD 8970M 6818
+343%
Quadro 3000M 1539

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.

HD 8970M 18667
+135%
Quadro 3000M 7941

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 HD51
+0%
51
+0%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data7.82

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+200%
8−9
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16 0−1
Battlefield 5 30−35
+933%
3−4
−933%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+300%
7−8
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+415%
12−14
−415%
Hitman 3 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+175%
20−22
−175%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+65.8%
35−40
−65.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+200%
8−9
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16 0−1
Battlefield 5 30−35
+933%
3−4
−933%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+300%
7−8
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+415%
12−14
−415%
Hitman 3 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+175%
20−22
−175%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 82
+531%
12−14
−531%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+65.8%
35−40
−65.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+200%
8−9
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+415%
12−14
−415%
Hitman 3 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+175%
20−22
−175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18
+38.5%
12−14
−38.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+65.8%
35−40
−65.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+350%
10−11
−350%
Hitman 3 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+200%
7−8
−200%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+327%
14−16
−327%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Hitman 3 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+330%
10−11
−330%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%

This is how HD 8970M and Quadro 3000M compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 1080p

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD 8970M is 1500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, HD 8970M surpassed Quadro 3000M in all 57 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.06 2.58
Recency 14 May 2013 22 February 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 75 Watt

HD 8970M has a 289.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro 3000M, on the other hand, has 33.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 8970M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 3000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8970M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro 3000M 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.

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.


AMD Radeon HD 8970M
Radeon HD 8970M
NVIDIA Quadro 3000M
Quadro 3000M

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.


4.4 46 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8970M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 49 votes

Rate Quadro 3000M 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.