Quadro P3200 vs Quadro 3000M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 3000M and Quadro P3200, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro 3000M
2011
2 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
2.58

P3200 outperforms 3000M by a whopping 781% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking814244
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.20no data
Power efficiency2.3821.00
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGF104GP104
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date22 February 2011 (13 years ago)21 February 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$398.96 no data

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 cores2401792
Core clock speed450 MHz1328 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1543 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate18.00172.8
Floating-point processing power0.432 TFLOPS5.53 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs40112

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 sizelargelarge
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 amount2 GB6 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed625 MHz1753 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s168.3 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-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.16.1

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.

Quadro 3000M 2.58
Quadro P3200 22.74
+781%

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.

Quadro 3000M 995
Quadro P3200 8775
+782%

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.

Quadro 3000M 1539
Quadro P3200 16619
+980%

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.

Quadro 3000M 7941
Quadro P3200 45999
+479%

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.

Quadro 3000M 3798
Quadro P3200 34242
+802%

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 HD44
−90.9%
84
+90.9%
4K3−4
−833%
28
+833%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.07no data
4K132.99no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−640%
35−40
+640%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
−713%
65
+713%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 35−40
Battlefield 5 3−4
−2400%
75−80
+2400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−683%
45−50
+683%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−640%
35−40
+640%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−960%
50−55
+960%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−954%
130−140
+954%
Hitman 3 7−8
−557%
45−50
+557%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
−435%
100−110
+435%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−3850%
75−80
+3850%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
−1073%
129
+1073%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−161%
95−100
+161%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
−1000%
88
+1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 35−40
Battlefield 5 3−4
−2400%
75−80
+2400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−683%
45−50
+683%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−640%
35−40
+640%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−960%
50−55
+960%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−954%
130−140
+954%
Hitman 3 7−8
−557%
45−50
+557%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
−435%
100−110
+435%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−3850%
75−80
+3850%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
−600%
75−80
+600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−285%
50−55
+285%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−161%
95−100
+161%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
−400%
40
+400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 35−40
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−683%
45−50
+683%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−640%
35−40
+640%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−960%
50−55
+960%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−454%
72
+454%
Hitman 3 7−8
−557%
45−50
+557%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
−435%
100−110
+435%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
−600%
75−80
+600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−254%
46
+254%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−161%
95−100
+161%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
−1000%
40−45
+1000%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−1100%
24−27
+1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1200%
24−27
+1200%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−767%
24−27
+767%
Hitman 3 8−9
−238%
27−30
+238%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
−571%
45−50
+571%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−1250%
27−30
+1250%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
−780%
130−140
+780%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−533%
35−40
+533%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−2200%
21−24
+2200%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1700%
18−20
+1700%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1100%
12−14
+1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−1200%
12−14
+1200%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1200%
12−14
+1200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 10−11

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−400%
20−22
+400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

This is how Quadro 3000M and Quadro P3200 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P3200 is 91% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P3200 is 833% faster in 4K

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro P3200 is 3850% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro P3200 is ahead in 57 tests (84%)
  • there's a draw in 11 tests (16%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.58 22.74
Recency 22 February 2011 21 February 2018
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 16 nm

Quadro P3200 has a 781.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P3200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 3000M in performance tests.


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 Quadro 3000M
Quadro 3000M
NVIDIA Quadro P3200
Quadro P3200

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.


3.8 44 votes

Rate Quadro 3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 292 votes

Rate Quadro P3200 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.