Riva 128 vs Quadro M3000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking354not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.39no data
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)no data
GPU code nameGM204NV3
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date18 August 2015 (9 years ago)1 April 1997 (27 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 cores1,024no data
Core clock speed1050 MHz100 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million4 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm350 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt4 Watt
Texture fill rate67.200.1
Floating-point processing power2.15 TFLOPSno data
ROPs321
TMUs641

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 x16AGP 2x
Widthno data1-slot
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 typeGDDR5SDR
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz100 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s1.6 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 outputs1x VGA, 1x DB13W3
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.

DirectX125.0
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.51.0
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA5.2-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 18 August 2015 1 April 1997
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 4 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 350 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 4 Watt

M3000M has an age advantage of 18 years, a 102300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1150% more advanced lithography process.

Riva 128, on the other hand, has 1775% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro M3000M and Riva 128. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro M3000M is a mobile workstation card while Riva 128 is a desktop 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
NVIDIA Riva 128
Riva 128

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.


3.8 347 votes

Rate Quadro M3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 37 votes

Rate Riva 128 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.