HD Graphics 400 vs Quadro M3000M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M3000M with HD Graphics 400, including specs and performance data.

M3000M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
14.63
+1195%

M3000M outperforms HD Graphics 400 by a whopping 1195% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3591078
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.3712.91
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)
GPU code nameGM204Braswell GT1
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date18 August 2015 (9 years ago)1 April 2015 (9 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 cores1,02496
Core clock speed1050 MHz320 MHz
Boost clock speedno data600 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt6 Watt
Texture fill rate67.207.200
Floating-point processing power2.15 TFLOPS0.1152 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
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16Ring Bus
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5DDR3L
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1253 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth160 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 compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_1)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.3
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan++
CUDA5.2-

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.

M3000M 14.63
+1195%
HD Graphics 400 1.13

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

M3000M 6537
+1353%
HD Graphics 400 450

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 HD61
+1425%
4−5
−1425%
4K27
+1250%
2−3
−1250%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+1433%
3−4
−1433%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+1229%
7−8
−1229%
Hitman 3 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+1360%
5−6
−1360%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+1500%
3−4
−1500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+1467%
3−4
−1467%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+1420%
5−6
−1420%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+1433%
3−4
−1433%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+1229%
7−8
−1229%
Hitman 3 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+1360%
5−6
−1360%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+1500%
3−4
−1500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+1467%
3−4
−1467%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90
+1400%
6−7
−1400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+1420%
5−6
−1420%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+1229%
7−8
−1229%
Hitman 3 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+1360%
5−6
−1360%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+1467%
3−4
−1467%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+1420%
5−6
−1420%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+1300%
2−3
−1300%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8 0−1
Far Cry 5 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+1380%
5−6
−1380%
Hitman 3 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+1367%
6−7
−1367%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12 0−1
Hitman 3 10−11 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+1320%
5−6
−1320%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+1300%
1−2
−1300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 8−9 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%

This is how M3000M and HD Graphics 400 compete in popular games:

  • M3000M is 1425% faster in 1080p
  • M3000M is 1250% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.63 1.13
Recency 18 August 2015 1 April 2015
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 6 Watt

M3000M has a 1194.7% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 4 months.

HD Graphics 400, on the other hand, has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 1150% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M3000M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 400 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M3000M is a mobile workstation card while HD Graphics 400 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 M3000M
Quadro M3000M
Intel HD Graphics 400
HD Graphics 400

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.


3.8 358 votes

Rate Quadro M3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 416 votes

Rate HD Graphics 400 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.