FirePro M4000 vs Quadro K3000M
FirePro M4000
Popular choices:
Quadro K3000M
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K3000M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro K3000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.4% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FirePro M4000.
| Insight | FirePro M4000 | Quadro K3000M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro K3000M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro M4000 and Quadro K3000M
FirePro M4000
The FirePro M4000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 27 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 675 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,596 points.
Quadro K3000M
The Quadro K3000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 1 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 654 MHz. It has 576 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,618 points. Launch price was $155.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro M4000 scores 1,596 and the Quadro K3000M reaches 1,618 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro M4000 is built on GCN 1.0 while the Quadro K3000M uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 512 (FirePro M4000) vs 576 (Quadro K3000M). Raw compute: 0.6912 TFLOPS (FirePro M4000) vs 0.7534 TFLOPS (Quadro K3000M).
| Feature | FirePro M4000 | Quadro K3000M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,596 | 1,618+1% |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 512 | 576+13% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6912 TFLOPS | 0.7534 TFLOPS+9% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 32 | 48+50% |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB+167% | 48 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro M4000 | Quadro K3000M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (FirePro M4000) vs 512 KB (Quadro K3000M) — the Quadro K3000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro M4000 | Quadro K3000M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro M4000 draws 33W versus the Quadro K3000M's 75W — a 77.8% difference. The FirePro M4000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro M4000) vs 350W (Quadro K3000M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | FirePro M4000 | Quadro K3000M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 33W-56% | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 82mm | — |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 48.4+124% | 21.6 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FirePro M4000 and Quadro K3000M
