Quadro K3100M vs Radeon RX Vega M GL

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Radeon RX Vega M GL Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Quadro K3000M Quadro K3100M Quadro K4000M Quadro K4100M Quadro K5000M Quadro K5100M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega M GL with Quadro K3100M, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega M GL
2018
4 GB HBM2, 65 Watt
8.70
+71.3%

RX Vega M GL outperforms K3100M by an impressive 71% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
RX Vega M GL RX Vega M GL
K3100M K3100M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking460609
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.27
Power efficiency10.625.38
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code namePolaris 22GK104
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date1 February 2018 (7 years ago)23 July 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores1280768
Core clock speed931 MHz706 MHz
Boost clock speed1011 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,000 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate80.8845.18
Floating-point processing power2.588 TFLOPS1.084 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs8064

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
InterfaceIGPMXM-B (3.0)

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 typeHBM2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width1024 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA-+

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.

RX Vega M GL 8.70
+71.3%
K3100M 5.08

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

RX Vega M GL 3886
+71.3%
K3100M 2268

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 HD55−60
+57.1%
35
−57.1%
4K24−27
+60%
15
−60%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data57.11
4Kno data133.27

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+72.7%
30−35
−72.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+61.9%
21−24
−61.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+53.8%
90−95
−53.8%
Dota 2 65−70
+47.8%
45−50
−47.8%
Fortnite 55−60
+72.7%
30−35
−72.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+89.5%
18−20
−89.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+61.9%
21−24
−61.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+78.6%
14
−78.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 65−70
+47.8%
45−50
−47.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+61.9%
21−24
−61.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+257%
7
−257%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+72.7%
30−35
−72.7%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+17.6%
16−18
−17.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+100%
5
−100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 35−40
+84.2%
18−20
−84.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
High Preset

Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how RX Vega M GL and K3100M compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega M GL is 57% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega M GL is 60% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX Vega M GL is 257% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX Vega M GL is ahead in 17 tests (27%)
  • there's a draw in 46 tests (73%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 8.70 5.08
Recency 1 February 2018 23 July 2013
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 75 Watt

RX Vega M GL has a 71.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 15.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega M GL is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K3100M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega M GL is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K3100M is a mobile workstation one.

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 RX Vega M GL
Radeon RX Vega M GL
NVIDIA Quadro K3100M
Quadro K3100M
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

RX Vega M GL Radeon RX Vega M GL
vs
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) Graphics 4 Cores iGPU (Arc)
K3100M Quadro K3100M
vs
FirePro M6100 FirePro M6100
RX Vega M GL Radeon RX Vega M GL
vs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7
GTX 1060 5 GB 1060 5 GB
vs
Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile 1050 3GB Mobile
GTX 1060 5 GB GTX 1060 5 GB
vs
R7 350 640SP R7 350 640SP
GTX 1060 5 GB 1060 5 GB
vs
RTX 3050 Mobile Refresh 6 GB 3050 Mobile Refresh 6 GB
RX Vega M GH RX Vega M GH
vs
RTX 2070 Super RTX 2070 Super
RX Vega M GH RX Vega M GH
vs
RTX 3050 4 GB RTX 3050 4 GB
RX Vega M GL RX Vega M GL
vs
GTX 760M GTX 760M
RX Vega M GL RX Vega M GL
vs
GeForce 920M 920M
RX Vega M GL RX Vega M GL
vs
HD Graphics 5500 HD Graphics 5500
RX Vega M GL RX Vega M GL
vs
GeForce 610M 610M
RX Vega M GL RX Vega M GL
vs
HD Graphics 2000 HD Graphics 2000

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.2 22 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega M GL on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 130 votes

Rate Quadro K3100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega M GL or Quadro K3100M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.