NVIDIA Quadro M3000M vs NVIDIA Quadro K2000
We compared two Professional market GPUs: 4GB VRAM Quadro M3000M and 2GB VRAM Quadro K2000 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
NVIDIA Quadro M3000M 's Advantages
Released 2 years and 5 months late
More VRAM (4GB vs 2GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (160.4GB/s vs 64.00GB/s)
640 additional rendering cores
NVIDIA Quadro K2000 's Advantages
Lower TDP (51W vs 75W)
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
Quadro M3000M
+193%
2.15 TFLOPS
Quadro K2000
0.733 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Aug 2015
Release Date
Mar 2013
Quadro Mobile
Generation
Quadro
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 3.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 2.0 x16
Clock Speeds
-
-
-
-
-
-
1253 MHz
Memory Clock
1000 MHz
Memory
4GB
Memory Size
2GB
GDDR5
Memory Type
GDDR5
256bit
Memory Bus
128bit
160.4GB/s
Bandwidth
64.00GB/s
Render Config
-
-
-
-
-
-
1024
Shading Units
384
64
TMUs
32
32
ROPs
16
-
-
-
-
-
-
48 KB (per SMM)
L1 Cache
16 KB (per SMX)
2 MB
L2 Cache
256 KB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
33.60 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
7.632 GPixel/s
67.20 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
30.53 GTexel/s
-
-
-
2.150 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
732.7 GFLOPS
67.20 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
30.53 GFLOPS
Board Design
75W
TDP
51W
-
Suggested PSU
250 W
No outputs
Outputs
1x DVI
2x DisplayPort 1.2
None
Power Connectors
None
Graphics Processor
GM204
GPU Name
GK107
N16E-Q1-A1
GPU Variant
GK107-301-A2
Maxwell 2.0
Architecture
Kepler
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
28 nm
Process Size
28 nm
5.2 billion
Transistors
1.27 billion
398 mm²
Die Size
118 mm²
Graphics Features
12 (12_1)
DirectX
12 (11_0)
4.6
OpenGL
4.6
3.0
OpenCL
3.0
1.3
Vulkan
1.1
5.2
CUDA
3.0
6.4
Shader Model
5.1
