Radeon RX Vega 11 Efficient vs Quadro FX 3000G

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameNV35Raven
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date22 July 2003 (21 year ago)23 April 2018 (6 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 coresno data704
Core clock speed400 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1250 MHz
Number of transistors135 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data35 Watt
Texture fill rate3.20055.00
Floating-point processing powerno data1.76 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs844

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).

InterfaceAGP 8xIGP
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1x MolexNone

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 typeDDRSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount256 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed425 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth27.2 GB/sno data

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 S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0a12 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGL1.5 (2.1)4.6
OpenCLN/A2.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 22 July 2003 23 April 2018
Chip lithography 130 nm 14 nm

RX Vega 11 Efficient has an age advantage of 14 years, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Quadro FX 3000G and Radeon RX Vega 11 Efficient. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3000G is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX Vega 11 Efficient is a desktop 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 FX 3000G
Quadro FX 3000G
AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 Efficient
Radeon RX Vega 11 Efficient

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Quadro FX 3000G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 16 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 11 Efficient 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.