Radeon HD 8690M vs Quadro 3000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 3000M with Radeon HD 8690M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 3000M
2011
2 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
2.59
+1.2%

3000M outperforms HD 8690M by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking822828
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.25no data
Power efficiency2.38no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGF104Sun
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date22 February 2011 (13 years ago)1 March 2013 (11 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 cores240320
Core clock speed450 MHz775 MHz
Boost clock speedno data825 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million690 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Wattno data
Texture fill rate18.0016.50
Floating-point processing power0.432 TFLOPS0.528 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs4020

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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x8

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 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed625 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s32 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
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.

Quadro 3000M 2.59
+1.2%
HD 8690M 2.56

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
+1.1%
HD 8690M 984

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
HD 8690M 1600
+4%

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 HD51
+240%
15
−240%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.82no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Elden Ring 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Elden Ring 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
World of Tanks 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
World of Tanks 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how Quadro 3000M and HD 8690M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro 3000M is 240% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Elden Ring, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the Quadro 3000M is 25% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro 3000M is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
  • there's a draw in 50 tests (96%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.59 2.56
Recency 22 February 2011 1 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm

Quadro 3000M has a 1.2% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

HD 8690M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro 3000M and Radeon HD 8690M.

Be aware that Quadro 3000M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon HD 8690M 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 Quadro 3000M
Quadro 3000M
AMD Radeon HD 8690M
Radeon HD 8690M

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.


3.8 49 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 97 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8690M 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.