AMD Radeon E8860 vs NVIDIA Quadro K3000M

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon E8860 and NVIDIA Quadro K3000M 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 Radeon E8860

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 7 month(s) later
• Around 11% higher pipelines: 640 vs 576
• Around 6% better floating-point performance: 800.0 gflops vs 753.4 gflops
• 2x lower typical power consumption: 37 Watt vs 75 Watt
• Around 61% higher memory clock speed: 4500 MHz vs 2800 MHz
• Around 3% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1686 vs 1639
• Around 29% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 436 vs 338
• 6.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 26300 vs 4211
• Around 41% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 20.395 vs 14.45
• Around 31% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 529.248 vs 403.983
• Around 70% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.683 vs 0.992
• Around 4% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 15.803 vs 15.202
• Around 97% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 47.86 vs 24.266
• Around 30% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 4345 vs 3353
• Around 30% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 4345 vs 3353

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M

• Around 14% higher core clock speed: 654 MHz vs 575 MHz
• Around 26% higher texture fill rate: 31.39 GTexel / s vs 25 GTexel / s
• 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2527 vs 1246
• 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3505 vs 1655
• 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2527 vs 1246
• 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3505 vs 1655

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon E8860
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K3000M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1686 1639
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	436 338
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	26300 4211
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	20.395 14.45
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	529.248 403.983
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.683 0.992
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	15.803 15.202
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	47.86 24.266
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1246 2527
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1655 3505
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4345 3353
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1246 2527
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1655 3505
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4345 3353

Compare specifications (specs)