Quadro K1000M vs UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) with Quadro K1000M, including specs and performance data.
UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) outperforms K1000M by a moderate 15% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 813 | 845 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.16 |
| Architecture | Gen. 12 (2021) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | Alder Lake Xe | N14P-Q1 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 3 January 2023 (1 year ago) | 1 June 2012 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $119.90 |
| Current price | no data | $232 (1.9x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 24 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 450 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 750 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,270 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 10 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 45 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 13.60 |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 326.4 gflops |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) and Quadro K1000M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | no data | 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 type | no data | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 1800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 28.8 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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | no data | + |
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | no data | + |
| CUDA | no data | + |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance 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.
UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) outperforms Quadro K1000M by 15% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) outperforms Quadro K1000M by 35% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) outperforms Quadro K1000M by 12% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.
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:
| 900p | 10−12
+11.1%
| 9
−11.1%
|
| Full HD | 8
−150%
| 20
+150%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| Hitman 3 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 11
−45.5%
|
16−18
+45.5%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 10
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| Hitman 3 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 10
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 12
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Hitman 3 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
This is how UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) and K1000M compete in popular games:
- UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) is 11% faster in 900p
- K1000M is 150% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) is 200% faster.
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the K1000M is 50% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) is ahead in 31 test (61%)
- K1000M is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
- there's a draw in 18 tests (35%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.33 | 2.02 |
| Recency | 3 January 2023 | 1 June 2012 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 28 nm |
The UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K1000M in performance tests.
Be aware that UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K1000M 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.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
