HD Graphics 3000 vs Quadro K3100M

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K3100M with HD Graphics 3000, including specs and performance data.

K3100M
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
5.07
+789%

K3100M outperforms HD Graphics 3000 by a whopping 789% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6071204
Place by popularitynot in top-10095
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.26no data
Power efficiency5.36no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 6.0 (2011)
GPU code nameGK104Sandy Bridge GT2+
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)1 February 2011 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,999 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores76896
Core clock speed706 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1300 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million1,160 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Wattunknown
Texture fill rate45.1815.60
Floating-point processing power1.084 TFLOPS0.2496 TFLOPS
ROPs322
TMUs6412

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)Ring Bus

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed800 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth102.4 GB/sno data
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 outputsPortable Device Dependent
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1211.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.53.1
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan+N/A
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.

K3100M 5.07
+789%
HD Graphics 3000 0.57

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.

K3100M 2267
+793%
HD Graphics 3000 254

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.

K3100M 15120
+864%
HD Graphics 3000 1568

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

K3100M 18389
+635%
HD Graphics 3000 2503

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 HD35
+289%
9
−289%
4K15
+1400%
1−2
−1400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p57.11no data
4K133.27no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Fortnite 30−35
+1000%
3−4
−1000%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+525%
4−5
−525%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Valorant 65−70
+124%
27−30
−124%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
+745%
11
−745%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Dota 2 45−50
+463%
8
−463%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Fortnite 30−35
+1000%
3−4
−1000%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+525%
4−5
−525%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+250%
4−5
−250%
Valorant 65−70
+124%
27−30
−124%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Dota 2 45−50
+543%
7
−543%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+525%
4−5
−525%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+75%
4−5
−75%
Valorant 65−70
+124%
27−30
−124%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+1000%
3−4
−1000%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+2000%
2−3
−2000%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7 0−1
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+500%
6−7
−500%
Valorant 60−65
+933%
6−7
−933%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+13.3%
14−16
−13.3%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5 0−1
Valorant 27−30
+600%
4−5
−600%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

This is how K3100M and HD Graphics 3000 compete in popular games:

  • K3100M is 289% faster in 1080p
  • K3100M is 1400% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the K3100M is 2000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, K3100M surpassed HD Graphics 3000 in all 32 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.07 0.57
Recency 23 July 2013 1 February 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm

K3100M has a 789.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro K3100M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 3000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K3100M is a mobile workstation card while HD Graphics 3000 is a mobile workstation one.

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 K3100M
Quadro K3100M
Intel HD Graphics 3000
HD Graphics 3000

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.


4 130 votes

Rate Quadro K3100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 2551 vote

Rate HD Graphics 3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K3100M or HD Graphics 3000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.