Quadro K3100M vs GeForce GTX 560 SE

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 560 SE with Quadro K3100M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 560 SE
2012
1 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
4.96

K3100M outperforms GTX 560 SE by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking631591
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.130.25
Power efficiency2.315.46
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGF114GK104
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date20 February 2012 (12 years ago)23 July 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$89.99 $1,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

K3100M has 92% better value for money than GTX 560 SE.

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 cores288768
Core clock speed736 MHz706 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate35.3345.18
Floating-point processing power0.8479 TFLOPS1.084 TFLOPS
ROPs2432
TMUs4864

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 2.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno 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 amount1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed957 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth91.87 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMINo outputs
HDMI+-
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 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
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A+
CUDA2.1+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 560 SE 4.96
K3100M 5.87
+18.3%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 560 SE 1914
K3100M 2264
+18.3%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 560 SE 2400
K3100M 2797
+16.5%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 560 SE 7009
+15.5%
K3100M 6071

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

GTX 560 SE 23
+21.1%
K3100M 19

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 HD27−30
−25.9%
34
+25.9%
4K12−14
−25%
15
+25%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.3358.79
4K7.50133.27

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+0%
46
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+0%
7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
+0%
5
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+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 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how GTX 560 SE and K3100M compete in popular games:

  • K3100M is 26% faster in 1080p
  • K3100M is 25% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 70 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.96 5.87
Recency 20 February 2012 23 July 2013
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 75 Watt

K3100M has a 18.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K3100M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 560 SE in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 560 SE is a desktop card while Quadro K3100M 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 GeForce GTX 560 SE
GeForce GTX 560 SE
NVIDIA Quadro K3100M
Quadro K3100M

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.


3.2 91 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 560 SE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 127 votes

Rate Quadro K3100M 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.