NVIDIA Quadro K3000M vs AMD Radeon HD 6750

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K3000M and AMD Radeon HD 6750 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. 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 NVIDIA Quadro K3000M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 4 month(s) later
• Around 25% higher texture fill rate: 31.39 GTexel / s vs 25.2 GTexel / s
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• Around 15% lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 86 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
• 2.7x more memory clock speed: 2800 MHz vs 1050 MHz
• Around 57% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1647 vs 1046
• Around 21% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 337 vs 278
• Around 80% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 14.45 vs 8.039
• Around 14% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.992 vs 0.867
• Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2527 vs 2100
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3505 vs 3378
• Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2527 vs 2100
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3505 vs 3378

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 6750

• Around 25% higher pipelines: 720 vs 576
• Around 34% better floating-point performance: 1,008.0 gflops vs 753.4 gflops
• Around 35% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 544.041 vs 403.983
• Around 36% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 20.664 vs 15.202
• 3.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 91.074 vs 24.266

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K3000M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6750

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1647 1046
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	337 278
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	14.45 8.039
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	403.983 544.041
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.992 0.867
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	15.202 20.664
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	24.266 91.074
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2527 2100
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3505 3378
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3353 3358
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2527 2100
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3505 3378
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3353 3358

Compare specifications (specs)