GRID K240Q vs GRID M3-3020

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.

GRID K240Q vs GRID M3-3020 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GRID K240Q vs GRID M3-3020: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GRID K240Q

2013

Why buy it

✅Costs $500 less on MSRP ($500 MSRP vs $1,000 MSRP).
✅Delivers 103.3% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 5.1 vs 2.5 G3D/$ ($500 MSRP vs $1,000 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌2013 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

GRID M3-3020

2016

Why buy it

✅More future proof: Maxwell (2014−2017) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌2016 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
100% HIGHER MSRP
$1,000 MSRPvs$500 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 2.5 vs 5.1 G3D/$ ($1,000 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GRID K240Q is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 1.6% in PassMark G3D (2,541 vs 2,500), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

GRID K240Q is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond because it comes out ahead on the available hardware-headroom signals for this matchup.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GRID K240Q makes the most sense to buy today. It is $500 cheaper on MSRP at $500 vs $1,000, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 103.3% (5.1 vs 2.5), so the value case lines up with the gaming result.

GRID K240Q vs GRID M3-3020 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GRID K240Q

The GRID K240Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 28 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,541 points. Launch price was $469.

GRID M3-3020

The GRID M3-3020 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 18 2016. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1033 MHz to 1306 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,500 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GRID K240Q scores 2,541 and the GRID M3-3020 reaches 2,500 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID K240Q is built on Kepler while the GRID M3-3020 uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,536 (GRID K240Q) vs 640 (GRID M3-3020). Raw compute: 2.289 TFLOPS (GRID K240Q) vs 1.672 TFLOPS (GRID M3-3020).

Feature	GRID K240Q	GRID M3-3020
G3D Mark Score	2,541+2%	2,500
Architecture	Kepler	Maxwell
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1536+140%	640
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.289 TFLOPS+37%	1.672 TFLOPS
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	128+220%	40
L1 Cache	128 KB	320 KB+150%
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	2 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GRID K240Q	GRID M3-3020
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards ship with 2 GB of GDDR5. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the GRID K240Q and 64-bit on the GRID M3-3020. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (GRID K240Q) vs 2 MB (GRID M3-3020) — the GRID M3-3020 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GRID K240Q	GRID M3-3020
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	2 MB+300%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GRID K240Q draws 225W versus the GRID M3-3020's 250W — a 10.5% difference. The GRID K240Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID K240Q) vs 350W (GRID M3-3020). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	GRID K240Q	GRID M3-3020
TDP	225W-10%	250W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	1mm	—
Slots	0	—
Temp (Load)	80°C	—
Perf/Watt	11.3+13%	10.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GRID K240Q came in at $500, while the GRID M3-3020 launched at $1000. On MSRP, GRID K240Q was 50% cheaper ($500 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 5.1 (GRID K240Q) vs 2.5 (GRID M3-3020) — the GRID K240Q offers 104% better value. The newer card here is GRID M3-3020 (2016 vs 2013).

Feature	GRID K240Q	GRID M3-3020
MSRP	$500-50%	$1000
Performance per Dollar	5.1+104%	2.5
Codename	GK104	GM107
Release	June 28 2013	May 18 2016
Ranking	#628	#587

Search GRID K240Q on Amazon

Search GRID M3-3020 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.