Iris Pro Graphics P6300 vs Quadro K3000M

Performance Spectrum - GPU

Iris Pro Graphics P6300

15

1,582

0.0%

HD Graphics 6000

Iris Graphics 6100

UHD Graphics G7 (Lakefield GT2 64 EU)

Iris Plus Graphics 640

1,618

+2.3%

RTX 2000E Ada Generation

TITAN V

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 K3000M

#38

Radeon PRO W6600X

MSRP: $699|Avg: $699

93%

#41

Quadro RTX 3000 (móvel)

MSRP: $600|Avg: $600

89%

#42

Radeon Pro W5700

MSRP: $799|Avg: $300

89%

#43

Radeon Pro W5700X

MSRP: $999|Avg: $999

87%

#44

RTX A4000

MSRP: $1111|Avg: $1111

87%

#45

RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell

MSRP: $849|Avg: $748

84%

#46

Quadro RTX 4000

MSRP: $899|Avg: $220

82%

#64

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

730%

#79

Quadro K3000M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#80

T400

MSRP: $180|Avg: $179

99%

#86

Quadro P3200

MSRP: $500|Avg: $63

85%

#89

Quadro P2000

MSRP: $425|Avg: $190

81%

#90

Quadro T1000

MSRP: $400|Avg: $425

80%

#93

Radeon Pro 580

MSRP: $500|Avg: $150

77%

#94

T1000 8GB

MSRP: $500|Avg: $380

76%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro K3000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.3% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (2 GB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Iris Pro Graphics P6300.

Insight	Iris Pro Graphics P6300	Quadro K3000M
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.3%)	✅Leading raw performance (+2.3%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Generation 8.0 (2014−2015))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100+%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	—

💎 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.

Iris Pro Graphics P6300 Benchmark Check

Quadro K3000M Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Iris Pro Graphics P6300 and Quadro K3000M

Iris Pro Graphics P6300

The Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in September 5 2014. It features the Generation 8.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 300 MHz to 800 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,582 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 Iris Pro Graphics P6300 scores 1,582 and the Quadro K3000M reaches 1,618 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is built on Generation 8.0 while the Quadro K3000M uses Kepler, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (Iris Pro Graphics P6300) vs 576 (Quadro K3000M). Raw compute: 0.6144 TFLOPS (Iris Pro Graphics P6300) vs 0.7534 TFLOPS (Quadro K3000M).

Feature	Iris Pro Graphics P6300	Quadro K3000M
G3D Mark Score	1,582	1,618+2%
Architecture	Generation 8.0	Kepler
Process Node	14 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	384	576+50%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.6144 TFLOPS	0.7534 TFLOPS+23%
ROPs	6	32+433%
TMUs	48	48

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Iris Pro Graphics P6300	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)

The Iris Pro Graphics P6300 comes with 0 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro K3000M has 2 GB. The Quadro K3000M offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: System vs 64-bit.

Feature	Iris Pro Graphics P6300	Quadro K3000M
VRAM Capacity	Shared System RAM	2 GB
Memory Type	Shared	GDDR5
Bus Width	System	64-bit

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Iris Pro Graphics P6300 draws 15W versus the Quadro K3000M's 75W — a 133.3% difference. The Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 1W (Iris Pro Graphics P6300) vs 350W (Quadro K3000M). Power connectors: Integrated vs PCIe-powered.