GRID M3-3020 vs Radeon RX 580
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 580 with GRID M3-3020, including specs and performance data.
RX 580 outperforms GRID M3-3020 by a whopping 199% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 248 | 530 |
| Place by popularity | 1 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 17.80 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 8.56 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Maxwell (2014−2017) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 20 | GM107 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 18 April 2017 (7 years ago) | 18 May 2016 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $229 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 | 2304 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 1257 MHz | 1033 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1340 MHz | 1306 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,700 million | 1,870 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 185 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 193.0 | 52.24 |
| Floating-point processing power | 6.175 TFLOPS | 1.672 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 16 |
| TMUs | 144 | 40 |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 241 mm | 267 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz | 1300 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 83.2 GB/s |
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 | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | - | 5.0 |
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 HD | 96
+220%
| 30−35
−220%
|
| 1440p | 44
+214%
| 14−16
−214%
|
| 4K | 38
+217%
| 12−14
−217%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 2.39 | no data |
| 1440p | 5.20 | no data |
| 4K | 6.03 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+200%
|
14−16
−200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 45−50
+229%
|
14−16
−229%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 80
+233%
|
24−27
−233%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+200%
|
14−16
−200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 45−50
+229%
|
14−16
−229%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 95−100
+230%
|
30−33
−230%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 60−65
+239%
|
18−20
−239%
|
| Metro Exodus | 83
+207%
|
27−30
−207%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 50−55
+219%
|
16−18
−219%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+207%
|
30−33
−207%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 117
+234%
|
35−40
−234%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+200%
|
14−16
−200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 45−50
+229%
|
14−16
−229%
|
| Dota 2 | 51
+219%
|
16−18
−219%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 70−75
+204%
|
24−27
−204%
|
| Fortnite | 110−120
+237%
|
35−40
−237%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 95−100
+230%
|
30−33
−230%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 60−65
+239%
|
18−20
−239%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 77
+221%
|
24−27
−221%
|
| Metro Exodus | 57
+217%
|
18−20
−217%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 202
+211%
|
65−70
−211%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 50−55
+219%
|
16−18
−219%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 70−75
+208%
|
24−27
−208%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+207%
|
30−33
−207%
|
| World of Tanks | 240−250
+211%
|
80−85
−211%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 68
+224%
|
21−24
−224%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+200%
|
14−16
−200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 45−50
+229%
|
14−16
−229%
|
| Dota 2 | 80−85
+233%
|
24−27
−233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 70−75
+204%
|
24−27
−204%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 95−100
+230%
|
30−33
−230%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 60−65
+239%
|
18−20
−239%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 70
+233%
|
21−24
−233%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+207%
|
30−33
−207%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+217%
|
12−14
−217%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35−40
+217%
|
12−14
−217%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+216%
|
55−60
−216%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 21−24
+200%
|
7−8
−200%
|
| World of Tanks | 150−160
+208%
|
50−55
−208%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+236%
|
14−16
−236%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+217%
|
6−7
−217%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65−70
+210%
|
21−24
−210%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 60−65
+239%
|
18−20
−239%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+208%
|
12−14
−208%
|
| Metro Exodus | 53
+231%
|
16−18
−231%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−35
+230%
|
10−11
−230%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+239%
|
18−20
−239%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
| Dota 2 | 57
+217%
|
18−20
−217%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 57
+217%
|
18−20
−217%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18
+200%
|
6−7
−200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 73
+204%
|
24−27
−204%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 14−16
+200%
|
5−6
−200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 57
+217%
|
18−20
−217%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 28
+211%
|
9−10
−211%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
+233%
|
12−14
−233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−33
+200%
|
10−11
−200%
|
| Fortnite | 31
+210%
|
10−11
−210%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+250%
|
10−11
−250%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 18−20
+217%
|
6−7
−217%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+222%
|
9−10
−222%
|
This is how RX 580 and GRID M3-3020 compete in popular games:
- RX 580 is 220% faster in 1080p
- RX 580 is 214% faster in 1440p
- RX 580 is 217% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 22.73 | 7.59 |
| Recency | 18 April 2017 | 18 May 2016 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 28 nm |
RX 580 has a 199.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 months, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 580 is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID M3-3020 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon RX 580 is a desktop 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.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
