Quadro M520 vs GRID M3-3020

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GRID M3-3020 with Quadro M520, including specs and performance data.

GRID M3-3020
2016
4 GB GDDR5
7.66
+57.9%

GRID M3-3020 outperforms M520 by an impressive 58% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking522635
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data13.52
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGM107GM108
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date18 May 2016 (8 years ago)11 January 2017 (7 years ago)

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 cores640384
Core clock speed1033 MHz1041 MHz
Boost clock speed1306 MHz1019 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data25 Watt
Texture fill rate52.2416.66
Floating-point processing power1.672 TFLOPS0.7995 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs4016

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 datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone

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 amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1300 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth83.2 GB/s40 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+
3D Stereono data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
CUDA5.05.0

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 HD30−35
+57.9%
19
−57.9%
4K21−24
+50%
14
−50%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 41
+0%
41
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Hitman 3 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how GRID M3-3020 and Quadro M520 compete in popular games:

  • GRID M3-3020 is 58% faster in 1080p
  • GRID M3-3020 is 50% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 68 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.66 4.85
Recency 18 May 2016 11 January 2017
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB

GRID M3-3020 has a 57.9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Quadro M520, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 months.

The GRID M3-3020 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M520 in performance tests.

Be aware that GRID M3-3020 is a workstation card while Quadro M520 is a mobile workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


NVIDIA GRID M3-3020
GRID M3-3020
NVIDIA Quadro M520
Quadro M520

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


5 1 vote

Rate GRID M3-3020 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 29 votes

Rate Quadro M520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.