Quadro K3100M vs FirePro D500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro D500 with Quadro K3100M, including specs and performance data.

FirePro D500
2014
3 GB GDDR5, 274 Watt
9.22
+81.9%

D500 outperforms K3100M by an impressive 82% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking443607
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.26
Power efficiency2.675.37
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameTahitiGK104
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date18 January 2014 (11 years ago)23 July 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1536768
Core clock speed725 MHz706 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)274 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate69.6045.18
Floating-point processing power2.227 TFLOPS1.084 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs9664

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length279 mmno data
Width2-slotno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount3 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1270 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth243.8 GB/s102.4 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x SDINo outputs
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus-+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_1)12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA-+

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD60−65
+71.4%
35
−71.4%
4K27−30
+80%
15
−80%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data57.11
4Kno data133.27

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+0%
14
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+0%
7
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
+0%
5
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how FirePro D500 and K3100M compete in popular games:

  • FirePro D500 is 71% faster in 1080p
  • FirePro D500 is 80% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.22 5.07
Recency 18 January 2014 23 July 2013
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 274 Watt 75 Watt

FirePro D500 has a 81.9% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 5 months.

K3100M, on the other hand, has a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 265.3% lower power consumption.

The FirePro D500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K3100M in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro D500 is a workstation card while Quadro K3100M is a mobile workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD FirePro D500
FirePro D500
NVIDIA Quadro K3100M
Quadro K3100M

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4 21 vote

Rate FirePro D500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 130 votes

Rate Quadro K3100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro D500 or Quadro K3100M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.