AMD FirePro M2000 vs NVIDIA Quadro 3000M

Comparative analysis of AMD FirePro M2000 and NVIDIA Quadro 3000M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro M2000

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 4 month(s) later
• Around 11% higher core clock speed: 500 MHz vs 450 MHz
• 2x more pipelines: 480 vs 240
• Around 11% better floating-point performance: 480.0 gflops vs 432.0 gflops
• 2.3x lower typical power consumption: 33 Watt vs 75 Watt
• Around 28% higher memory clock speed: 3200 MHz vs 2500 MHz
• Around 58% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 44.254 vs 27.961
• 2.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 544 vs 218
• 4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1498 vs 374
• 3.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1709 vs 543
• 2.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 544 vs 218
• 4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1498 vs 374
• 3.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1709 vs 543

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 3000M

• Around 50% higher texture fill rate: 18 GTexel / s vs 12 GTexel / s
• 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
• 2.3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 994 vs 425
• Around 50% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 310 vs 206
• 3.3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3807 vs 1168
• 3.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 10.95 vs 3.284
• Around 66% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 325.007 vs 195.801
• 2.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.865 vs 0.31
• Around 33% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 13.794 vs 10.402

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD FirePro M2000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 3000M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	425 994
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	206 310
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	1168 3807
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.284 10.95
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	195.801 325.007
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.31 0.865
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	10.402 13.794
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	44.254 27.961
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	544 218
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1498 374
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1709 543
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	544 218
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1498 374
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1709 543

Compare specifications (specs)