Quadro K3100M vs Radeon E8950

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon E8950 with Quadro K3100M, including specs and performance data.

Radeon E8950
2015
8 GB GDDR5, 95 Watt
14.17
+141%

E8950 outperforms K3100M by a whopping 141% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking364588
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.23
Power efficiency10.335.42
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameAmethystGK104
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date29 September 2015 (9 years ago)23 July 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,999

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 cores2048768
Core clock speed735 MHz706 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,000 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate128.045.18
Floating-point processing power4.096 TFLOPS1.084 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs12864

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-B (3.0)
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/s102.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus-+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA-+

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 HD75−80
+134%
32
−134%
4K35−40
+133%
15
−133%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data62.47
4Kno data133.27

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+0%
46
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+0%
7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
+0%
5
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how Radeon E8950 and K3100M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon E8950 is 134% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon E8950 is 133% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 70 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.17 5.87
Recency 29 September 2015 23 July 2013
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 75 Watt

Radeon E8950 has a 141.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

K3100M, on the other hand, has 26.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon E8950 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K3100M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon E8950 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K3100M 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.


AMD Radeon E8950
Radeon E8950
NVIDIA Quadro K3100M
Quadro K3100M

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.


4.6 14 votes

Rate Radeon E8950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 125 votes

Rate Quadro K3100M 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.