Radeon Pro 5300 vs Quadro K3100M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K3100M with Radeon Pro 5300, including specs and performance data.

K3100M
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
5.87

Pro 5300 outperforms K3100M by a whopping 215% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking588294
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.23no data
Power efficiency5.6515.71
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameGK104Navi 14
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)4 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,999 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 cores7681280
Core clock speed706 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1650 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt85 Watt
Texture fill rate45.18132.0
Floating-point processing power1.084 TFLOPS4.224 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs6480

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)PCIe 4.0 x8
Widthno dataIGP
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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth102.4 GB/s224.0 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
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 compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
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.

K3100M 5.87
Pro 5300 18.51
+215%

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 2264
Pro 5300 7143
+216%

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 HD32
−213%
100−110
+213%
4K15
−200%
45−50
+200%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−200%
45−50
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−213%
50−55
+213%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−208%
40−45
+208%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
−213%
50−55
+213%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−189%
110−120
+189%
Hitman 3 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
−206%
110−120
+206%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−200%
45−50
+200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−213%
50−55
+213%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
−200%
60−65
+200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−206%
150−160
+206%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−200%
45−50
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−213%
50−55
+213%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−208%
40−45
+208%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
−213%
50−55
+213%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−189%
110−120
+189%
Hitman 3 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
−206%
110−120
+206%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−200%
45−50
+200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−213%
50−55
+213%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
−200%
60−65
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
−204%
140−150
+204%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−206%
150−160
+206%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−200%
45−50
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−208%
40−45
+208%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−189%
110−120
+189%
Hitman 3 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
−206%
110−120
+206%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
−200%
60−65
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
−200%
21−24
+200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−206%
150−160
+206%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−213%
50−55
+213%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
−173%
30−33
+173%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−200%
27−30
+200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−194%
50−55
+194%
Hitman 3 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−208%
40−45
+208%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−197%
110−120
+197%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Hitman 3 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−208%
40−45
+208%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
−180%
14−16
+180%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−200%
18−20
+200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−200%
18−20
+200%

This is how K3100M and Pro 5300 compete in popular games:

  • Pro 5300 is 213% faster in 1080p
  • Pro 5300 is 200% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.87 18.51
Recency 23 July 2013 4 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 85 Watt

K3100M has 13.3% lower power consumption.

Pro 5300, on the other hand, has a 215.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro 5300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K3100M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K3100M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon Pro 5300 is a 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 K3100M
Quadro K3100M
AMD Radeon Pro 5300
Radeon Pro 5300

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.


4 125 votes

Rate Quadro K3100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 98 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 5300 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.