Quadro K3000M vs GeForce GTX 860M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 860M with Quadro K3000M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 860M
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
7.91
+85.7%

GTX 860M outperforms K3000M by an impressive 86% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking520680
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.72
Power efficiency7.233.89
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGM107GK104
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date13 January 2014 (10 years ago)1 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$155

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores1152 or 640576
Core clock speed797 MHz654 MHz
Boost clock speed1085 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate43.4031.39
Floating-point processing power1.389 TFLOPS0.7534 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs4048

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data
SLI options+-

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
Standard memory configurationGDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 2500 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidth80.0 GB/s89.6 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
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI+-
HDCP content protection+-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+-

Supported technologies

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

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus++
Ansel+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
CUDA++

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 860M 7.91
+85.7%
K3000M 4.26

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 860M 3047
+85.5%
K3000M 1643

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 860M 4902
+102%
K3000M 2427

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 860M 19216
+61.4%
K3000M 11902

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 860M 10362
+147%
K3000M 4199

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 860M 30
+114%
K3000M 14

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:

900p91
+176%
33
−176%
Full HD36
+9.1%
33
−9.1%
4K13
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.70
4Kno data22.14

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+100%
24−27
−100%
Hitman 3 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+60.7%
27−30
−60.7%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+156%
9−10
−156%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+100%
10−12
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+27.3%
40−45
−27.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+100%
24−27
−100%
Hitman 3 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+60.7%
27−30
−60.7%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+156%
9−10
−156%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+100%
10−12
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60
+275%
16−18
−275%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+27.3%
40−45
−27.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+100%
24−27
−100%
Hitman 3 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+60.7%
27−30
−60.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+27.3%
40−45
−27.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+100%
10−12
−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+400%
6−7
−400%
Hitman 3 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Metro Exodus 10−11 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+92.3%
24−27
−92.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Hitman 3 4−5 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+2700%
1−2
−2700%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%

This is how GTX 860M and K3000M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 860M is 176% faster in 900p
  • GTX 860M is 9% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 860M is 86% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 860M is 2700% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the K3000M is 33% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 860M is ahead in 64 tests (98%)
  • K3000M is ahead in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.91 4.26
Recency 13 January 2014 1 June 2012
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB

GTX 860M has a 85.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The GeForce GTX 860M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K3000M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 860M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K3000M 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 860M
GeForce GTX 860M
NVIDIA Quadro K3000M
Quadro K3000M

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.


3.7 449 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 860M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 69 votes

Rate Quadro K3000M 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.