NVIDIA Quadro M3000M vs NVIDIA GeForce 9500M GE
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M3000M and NVIDIA GeForce 9500M GE 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 M3000M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 7 year(s) 7 month(s) later
- 42.7x more pipelines: 1,024 vs 24
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 65 nm
- 16x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 256 MB
- 53.8x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5597 vs 104
- Around 26% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 403 vs 320
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 18 August 2015 vs 9 January 2008 |
Pipelines | 1,024 vs 24 |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 65 nm |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 256 MB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5597 vs 104 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 403 vs 320 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 9500M GE
- 3x lower typical power consumption: 25 Watt vs 75 Watt
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 25 Watt vs 75 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M3000M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 9500M GE
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA Quadro M3000M | NVIDIA GeForce 9500M GE |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5597 | 104 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 403 | 320 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 16559 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 82.563 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1266.506 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.91 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 70.779 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 252.607 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7779 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3720 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3360 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7779 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3720 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3360 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA Quadro M3000M | NVIDIA GeForce 9500M GE | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | |
Code name | GM204 | MCP79Mx + NB9M |
Launch date | 18 August 2015 | 9 January 2008 |
Place in performance rating | 507 | 505 |
Type | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 1050 MHz | |
Floating-point performance | 2,150 gflops | |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 65 nm |
Pipelines | 1,024 | 24 |
Texture fill rate | 67.2 GTexel / s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 25 Watt |
Transistor count | 5,200 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | |
Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
Laptop size | large | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 10.0 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | |
Shader Model | 5.0 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 256 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 160 GB / s | |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR2, GDDR3 |
Shared memory | 0 | 1 |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision Pro | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus |