Iris Xe Graphics MAX vs Quadro K3000M

Place in the ranking	680	623
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.70	no data
Power efficiency	3.90	14.02
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code name	GK104	DG1
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	1 June 2012 (12 years ago)	31 October 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$155	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 cores	576	768
Core clock speed	654 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	no data	1650 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	25 Watt
Texture fill rate	31.39	79.20
Floating-point processing power	0.7534 TFLOPS	2.534 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	24
TMUs	48	48

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 size	large	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x4
Width	no data	IGP

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 type	GDDR5	LPDDR4X
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	700 MHz	4.3 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	89.6 GB/s	68.26 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no 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 Connectors

No 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.

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	+	1.2
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.

K3000M 4.26

Iris Xe Graphics MAX 5.11
+20%

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.

K3000M 1643

Iris Xe Graphics MAX 1971
+20%

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:

900p	33 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%
Full HD	33 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

4.70

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

7−8

−14.3%

8−9
+14.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −16.7%	14−16 +16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Battlefield 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −16.7%	14−16 +16.7%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −15.4%	30−33 +15.4%
Hitman 3	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −7.1%	30−33 +7.1%
Metro Exodus	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −12.5%	18−20 +12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −13.6%	50−55 +13.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −16.7%	14−16 +16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Battlefield 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −16.7%	14−16 +16.7%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −15.4%	30−33 +15.4%
Hitman 3	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −7.1%	30−33 +7.1%
Metro Exodus	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −12.5%	18−20 +12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −12.5%	18−20 +12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −13.6%	50−55 +13.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −16.7%	14−16 +16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −15.4%	30−33 +15.4%
Hitman 3	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −7.1%	30−33 +7.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −12.5%	18−20 +12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −12.5%	18−20 +12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −13.6%	50−55 +13.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12

−9.1%

12−14
+9.1%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Hitman 3	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 −15.4%	30−33 +15.4%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9

−12.5%

9−10
+12.5%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Hitman 3	0−1	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +0%	3−4 +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	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

+0%

5−6
+0%

This is how K3000M and Iris Xe Graphics MAX compete in popular games:

Iris Xe Graphics MAX is 6% faster in 900p
Iris Xe Graphics MAX is 6% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.26	5.11
Recency	1 June 2012	31 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	25 Watt

Iris Xe Graphics MAX has a 20% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

The Iris Xe Graphics MAX is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K3000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K3000M is a mobile workstation card while Iris Xe Graphics MAX is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.