FirePro V4900 vs Quadro 3000M
FirePro V4900
Popular choices:
Quadro 3000M
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. The FirePro V4900 is positioned at rank 212 and the Quadro 3000M is on rank 120, so the Quadro 3000M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro V4900
Performance Per Dollar Quadro 3000M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro V4900 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.8% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro 3000M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | FirePro V4900 | Quadro 3000M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.8%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi (2010−2014)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the FirePro V4900 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 V4900 and Quadro 3000M
FirePro V4900
The FirePro V4900 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 1 2011. It features the TeraScale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 800 MHz. It has 480 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,009 points.
Quadro 3000M
The Quadro 3000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 22 2011. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 450 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,001 points. Launch price was $398.96.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro V4900 scores 1,009 and the Quadro 3000M reaches 1,001 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro V4900 is built on TeraScale 2 while the Quadro 3000M uses Fermi, both on a 40 nm process. Shader units: 480 (FirePro V4900) vs 240 (Quadro 3000M). Raw compute: 0.768 TFLOPS (FirePro V4900) vs 0.432 TFLOPS (Quadro 3000M).
| Feature | FirePro V4900 | Quadro 3000M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,009 | 1,001 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Fermi |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 480+100% | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.768 TFLOPS+78% | 0.432 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 32+300% |
| TMUs | 24 | 40+67% |
| L1 Cache | 48 KB | 320 KB+567% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro V4900 | Quadro 3000M |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The FirePro V4900 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro 3000M has 2 GB. The Quadro 3000M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (FirePro V4900) vs 512 KB (Quadro 3000M) — the Quadro 3000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro V4900 | Quadro 3000M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 2 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro V4900 draws 75W versus the Quadro 3000M's 75W — a 0% difference. The Quadro 3000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro V4900) vs 350W (Quadro 3000M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | FirePro V4900 | Quadro 3000M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 163mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 13.5+2% | 13.3 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FirePro V4900 and Quadro 3000M
