ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650 vs Quadro M3000M

Place in the ranking	357	1284
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	13.51	0.81
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code name	GM204	M86
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	18 August 2015 (9 years ago)	7 January 2008 (16 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 cores	1,024	120
Core clock speed	1050 MHz	500 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	378 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	30 Watt
Texture fill rate	67.20	4.000
Floating-point processing power	2.15 TFLOPS	0.12 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	4
TMUs	64	8

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	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-II
Supplementary power connectors	None	no 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	700 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160 GB/s	22.4 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 Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
Display Port	1.2	no 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.

DirectX	12	10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	6.4	4.1
OpenGL	4.5	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	N/A
Vulkan	+	N/A
CUDA	5.2	-

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 14.53
+4051%

ATI Mobility HD 3650 0.35

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.

M3000M 27405
+3105%

ATI Mobility HD 3650 855

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 HD	62 +6100%	1−2 −6100%
4K	28	0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

21−24
+1000%

2−3

−1000%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24	0−1
Battlefield 5	45−50 +4500%	1−2 −4500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 +1350%	2−3 −1350%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +1000%	2−3 −1000%
Far Cry 5	30−35	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +4550%	2−3 −4550%
Hitman 3	27−30 +575%	4−5 −575%
Horizon Zero Dawn	70−75 +813%	8−9 −813%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +4700%	1−2 −4700%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +1075%	4−5 −1075%
Watch Dogs: Legion	75−80 +171%	27−30 −171%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24	0−1
Battlefield 5	45−50 +4500%	1−2 −4500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 +1350%	2−3 −1350%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +1000%	2−3 −1000%
Far Cry 5	30−35	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +4550%	2−3 −4550%
Hitman 3	27−30 +575%	4−5 −575%
Horizon Zero Dawn	70−75 +813%	8−9 −813%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +4700%	1−2 −4700%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +1075%	4−5 −1075%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	90 +900%	9−10 −900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	75−80 +171%	27−30 −171%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 +1350%	2−3 −1350%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +1000%	2−3 −1000%
Far Cry 5	30−35	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +4550%	2−3 −4550%
Hitman 3	27−30 +575%	4−5 −575%
Horizon Zero Dawn	70−75 +813%	8−9 −813%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +1075%	4−5 −1075%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	22 +144%	9−10 −144%
Watch Dogs: Legion	75−80 +171%	27−30 −171%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−12	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8	0−1
Far Cry 5	16−18	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +7300%	1−2 −7300%
Hitman 3	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +1350%	2−3 −1350%
Metro Exodus	24−27	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +4300%	2−3 −4300%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

21−24
+1050%

2−3

−1050%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12	0−1
Hitman 3	10−11	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	70−75 +7000%	1−2 −7000%
Metro Exodus	14−16	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
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	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	6−7	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14
+550%

2−3

−550%

This is how M3000M and ATI Mobility HD 3650 compete in popular games:

M3000M is 6100% faster in 1080p

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

in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the M3000M is 1350% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, M3000M surpassed ATI Mobility HD 3650 in all 29 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	14.53	0.35
Recency	18 August 2015	7 January 2008
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	30 Watt

M3000M has a 4051.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.

ATI Mobility HD 3650, on the other hand, has 150% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M3000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 3650 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M3000M is a mobile workstation card while Mobility Radeon HD 3650 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.