GRID M3-3020 vs P106-090
GRID M3-3020
Popular choices:
P106-090
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 GRID M3-3020 is positioned at rank 265 and the P106-090 is on rank 184, so the P106-090 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID M3-3020
Performance Per Dollar P106-090
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID M3-3020 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 P106-090.
| Insight | GRID M3-3020 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.4%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | Standard Size (250mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The P106-090 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the P106-090 holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $50), it costs 40% less, resulting in a 64.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID M3-3020 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+64.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($50) | ✅More affordable ($30) |
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 GRID M3-3020 and P106-090
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.
P106-090
The P106-090 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 31 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1354 MHz to 1531 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,466 points.
Graphics Performance
The GRID M3-3020 scores 2,500 and the P106-090 reaches 2,466 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID M3-3020 is built on Maxwell while the P106-090 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 640 (GRID M3-3020) vs 768 (P106-090). Raw compute: 1.672 TFLOPS (GRID M3-3020) vs 2.352 TFLOPS (P106-090). Boost clocks: 1306 MHz vs 1531 MHz.
| Feature | GRID M3-3020 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,500+1% | 2,466 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 640 | 768+20% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.672 TFLOPS | 2.352 TFLOPS+41% |
| Boost Clock | 1306 MHz | 1531 MHz+17% |
| ROPs | 16 | 48+200% |
| TMUs | 40 | 48+20% |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB+11% | 288 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+33% | 1.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID M3-3020 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 2 MB (GRID M3-3020) vs 1.5 MB (P106-090) — the GRID M3-3020 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID M3-3020 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+33% | 1.5 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID M3-3020 draws 250W versus the P106-090's 75W — a 107.7% difference. The P106-090 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID M3-3020) vs 350W (P106-090). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GRID M3-3020 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 75W-70% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 250mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | — | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 60°C |
| Perf/Watt | 10.0 | 32.9+229% |
Value Analysis
The GRID M3-3020 launched at $1000 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the P106-090 launched at $389 and now averages $30. The P106-090 costs 40% less ($20 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 50.0 (GRID M3-3020) vs 82.2 (P106-090) — the P106-090 offers 64.4% better value. The P106-090 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2016).
| Feature | GRID M3-3020 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1000 | $389-61% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50 | $30-40% |
| Performance per Dollar | 50.0 | 82.2+64% |
| Codename | GM107 | GP106 |
| Release | May 18 2016 | July 31 2017 |
| Ranking | #587 | #639 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GRID M3-3020 and P106-090
