NVIDIA Quadro K3000M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K3000M and NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 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 3 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- 4.5x more pipelines: 576 vs 128
- Around 95% better floating-point performance: 753.4 gflops vs 387.1 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 55 nm
- 2x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 150 Watt
- 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
- 2.5x more memory clock speed: 2800 MHz vs 1100 MHz
- 2.7x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1652 vs 601
- 5.8x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 341 vs 59
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3505 vs 3108
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3505 vs 3108
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 1 June 2012 vs 4 March 2009 |
| Pipelines | 576 vs 128 |
| Floating-point performance | 753.4 gflops vs 387.1 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 55 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt vs 150 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 1 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 2800 MHz vs 1100 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1652 vs 601 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 341 vs 59 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3505 vs 3108 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 vs 3351 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3505 vs 3108 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 vs 3351 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- 2.8x more core clock speed: 1836 MHz vs 654 MHz
- Around 50% higher texture fill rate: 47.2 billion / sec vs 31.39 GTexel / s
| Core clock speed | 1836 MHz vs 654 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 47.2 billion / sec vs 31.39 GTexel / s |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K3000M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro K3000M | NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1652 | 601 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 341 | 59 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 4252 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.45 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 403.983 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.992 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.202 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 24.266 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2527 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3505 | 3108 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 3351 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2527 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3505 | 3108 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 3351 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro K3000M | NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | Tesla |
| Code name | GK104 | G92B |
| Launch date | 1 June 2012 | 4 March 2009 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $155 | $199 |
| Place in performance rating | 1023 | 1038 |
| Price now | $155 | $114.99 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 13.57 | 9.91 |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 654 MHz | 1836 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 753.4 gflops | 387.1 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Pipelines | 576 | 128 |
| Texture fill rate | 31.39 GTexel / s | 47.2 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Transistor count | 3,540 million | 754 million |
| CUDA cores | 128 | |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, Two Dual Link DVI |
| Audio input for HDMI | S / PDIF | |
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
| Length | 9" (228.6 mm) (22.9 cm) | |
| SLI options | 2-way3-way | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB / s | 70.4 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2800 MHz | 1100 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro K3000M with others
NVIDIAQuadro K3000M vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 2600
NVIDIAQuadro K3000M vs
NVIDIAGeForce G205M
NVIDIAQuadro K3000M vs
AMDRadeon HD 7470M
NVIDIAQuadro K3000M vs
AMDRadeon HD 8730 OEM
NVIDIAQuadro K3000M vs
AMDRadeon HD 8280 IGP
NVIDIAQuadro K3000M vs
AMDRadeon E8860
