Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) vs Quadro M3000M

Performance Spectrum - GPU

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)

15

5,500

0.0%

5,574

+1.3%

GeForce RTX 2070 Super Mobile

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Laptop 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.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro M3000M

#1

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

186%

#9

Quadro M3000M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is significantly newer (2023 vs 2015). The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro M3000M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro M3000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc).

Insight	Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)	Quadro M3000M
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.3%)	✅Leading raw performance (+1.3%)
Longevity	Xe LPG (2023) (5nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro M3000M 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.

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) Benchmark Check

Quadro M3000M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) and Quadro M3000M

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)

The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is manufactured by Intel. It was released in December 14 2023. It features the Xe LPG architecture. The boost clock speed is 1950 MHz. It has 4 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,500 points.

Quadro M3000M

The Quadro M3000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 18 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 1050 MHz. It has 1,024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,574 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) scores 5,500 and the Quadro M3000M reaches 5,574 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is built on Xe LPG while the Quadro M3000M uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 5 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 4 (Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)) vs 1 (Quadro M3000M).

Feature	Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)	Quadro M3000M
G3D Mark Score	5,500	5,574+1%
Architecture	Xe LPG	Maxwell 2.0
Process Node	5 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	4	1,024+25500%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)	Quadro M3000M
Upscaling Tech	XeSS	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	FSR 3 (Compatible)	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Bus width: System vs 128-bit.

Feature	Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)	Quadro M3000M
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	Shared	GDDR6
Bus Width	System	128-bit

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12_2 (Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)) vs 12 (12_1) (Quadro M3000M). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)	Quadro M3000M
DirectX	12_2	12 (12_1)
Vulkan	1.3	1.4+8%
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: QuickSync (Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)) vs 3rd Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M3000M). Decoder: QuickSync vs PureVideo HD VP6. Supported codecs: MPEG2,AVC,VP9,HEVC,AV1 (Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)) vs H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Decode Only) (Quadro M3000M).

Feature	Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)	Quadro M3000M
Encoder	QuickSync	3rd Gen NVENC (Maxwell)
Decoder	QuickSync	PureVideo HD VP6
Codecs	MPEG2,AVC,VP9,HEVC,AV1	H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Decode Only)

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) draws 15W versus the Quadro M3000M's 75W — a 133.3% difference. The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)) vs 350W (Quadro M3000M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.