Radeon HD 6990M vs Quadro M3000M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M3000M with Radeon HD 6990M, including specs and performance data.

M3000M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
14.54
+177%

M3000M outperforms HD 6990M by a whopping 177% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking357613
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.513.66
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGM204Blackcomb
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date18 August 2015 (9 years ago)12 July 2011 (13 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 cores1,0241120
Core clock speed1050 MHz715 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million1,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate67.2040.04
Floating-point processing power2.15 TFLOPS1.602 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs6456

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 sizelargelarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s115.2 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.

DirectX1211.2 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.0
OpenGL4.54.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+N/A
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 14.54
+177%
HD 6990M 5.25

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

M3000M 8289
+157%
HD 6990M 3227

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
+81.3%
HD 6990M 15113

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:

900p140−150
+159%
54
−159%
Full HD62
+3.3%
60
−3.3%
4K28
+180%
10−12
−180%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+144%
9−10
−144%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+136%
14−16
−136%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+229%
14−16
−229%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+164%
10−12
−164%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+144%
9−10
−144%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+160%
14−16
−160%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+182%
30−35
−182%
Hitman 3 27−30
+145%
10−12
−145%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+121%
30−35
−121%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+269%
12−14
−269%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+179%
14−16
−179%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+147%
18−20
−147%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+61.7%
45−50
−61.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+136%
14−16
−136%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+229%
14−16
−229%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+164%
10−12
−164%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+144%
9−10
−144%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+160%
14−16
−160%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+182%
30−35
−182%
Hitman 3 27−30
+145%
10−12
−145%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+121%
30−35
−121%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+269%
12−14
−269%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+179%
14−16
−179%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+147%
18−20
−147%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90
+400%
18−20
−400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+61.7%
45−50
−61.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+136%
14−16
−136%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+164%
10−12
−164%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+144%
9−10
−144%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+182%
30−35
−182%
Hitman 3 27−30
+145%
10−12
−145%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+121%
30−35
−121%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+147%
18−20
−147%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+22.2%
18−20
−22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+61.7%
45−50
−61.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+179%
14−16
−179%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+180%
10−11
−180%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+469%
12−14
−469%
Hitman 3 16−18
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+142%
12−14
−142%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+733%
3−4
−733%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+178%
9−10
−178%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+167%
30−35
−167%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+156%
9−10
−156%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Hitman 3 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+689%
9−10
−689%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+1300%
1−2
−1300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+375%
4−5
−375%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%

This is how M3000M and HD 6990M compete in popular games:

  • M3000M is 159% faster in 900p
  • M3000M is 3% faster in 1080p
  • M3000M is 180% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the M3000M is 1300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, M3000M surpassed HD 6990M in all 68 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.54 5.25
Recency 18 August 2015 12 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 100 Watt

M3000M has a 177% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 33.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M3000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6990M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M3000M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon HD 6990M 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
AMD Radeon HD 6990M
Radeon HD 6990M

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.


3.8 352 votes

Rate Quadro M3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 14 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6990M 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.