Quadro K3000M vs Radeon R9 370

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 370 with Quadro K3000M, including specs and performance data.

R9 370
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 110 Watt
10.68
+193%

R9 370 outperforms K3000M by a whopping 193% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking447733
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.69
Power efficiency7.813.92
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameTrinidadGK104
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date5 May 2015 (10 years ago)1 June 2012 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$155

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores1280576
Core clock speed925 MHz654 MHz
Boost clock speed975 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,800 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate78.0031.39
Floating-point processing power2.496 TFLOPS0.7534 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs8048
L1 Cache384 KB48 KB
L2 Cache512 KB512 KB

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length221 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data

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 speed1400 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s89.6 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus-+

API and SDK 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
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R9 370 10.68
+193%
K3000M 3.65

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.

R9 370 Samples: 3 4722
+192%
K3000M Samples: 367 1616

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:

900p95−100
+188%
33
−188%
Full HD45
+21.6%
37
−21.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.19

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how R9 370 and K3000M compete in popular games:

  • R9 370 is 188% faster in 900p
  • R9 370 is 22% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.68 3.65
Recency 5 May 2015 1 June 2012
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 75 Watt

R9 370 has a 192.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

K3000M, on the other hand, has 46.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 370 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K3000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 370 is a desktop graphics card while Quadro K3000M is a mobile workstation one.

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 R9 370
Radeon R9 370
NVIDIA Quadro K3000M
Quadro K3000M

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.


4 445 votes

Rate Radeon R9 370 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 70 votes

Rate Quadro K3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 370 or Quadro K3000M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.