Quadro 3000M vs Quadro FX 4800

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.

Quadro 3000M vs Quadro FX 4800 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.

Quadro 3000M vs Quadro FX 4800: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Quadro 3000M

2011

Why buy it

✅19.6% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅33.3% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (2 GB vs 2 GB).
✅Draws 75W instead of 150W, a 75W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌2011 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 0.6 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $1,799 MSRP).

Quadro FX 4800

2008

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 0.6 vs 0 G3D/$ ($1,799 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro 3000M across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 2 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2008 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 power demand at 150W vs 75W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Quadro 3000M is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 19.6% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. PassMark G3D leans toward Quadro FX 4800 instead at 1,005 vs 1,001, so for this question the real-game FPS result matters more than the synthetic split.

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

Quadro 3000M is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 2 GB vs 2 GB of VRAM, a 40nm process instead of 55nm, and a newer 2011 generation instead of 2008. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Quadro FX 4800 makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, Quadro FX 4800 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, Quadro 3000M has the stronger long-term case.

Quadro 3000M vs Quadro FX 4800 Technical Specifications

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

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.

Quadro FX 4800

The Quadro FX 4800 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,005 points. Launch price was $1,799.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro 3000M scores 1,001 and the Quadro FX 4800 reaches 1,005 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro 3000M is built on Fermi while the Quadro FX 4800 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 40 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro 3000M) vs 192 (Quadro FX 4800). Raw compute: 0.432 TFLOPS (Quadro 3000M) vs 0.4623 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 4800).

Feature	Quadro 3000M	Quadro FX 4800
G3D Mark Score	1,001	1,005
Architecture	Fermi	Tesla 2.0
Process Node	40 nm	55 nm
Shading Units	240+25%	192
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.432 TFLOPS	0.4623 TFLOPS+7%
ROPs	32+33%	24
TMUs	40	64+60%
L2 Cache	512 KB+167%	192 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro 3000M	Quadro FX 4800
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro 3000M has 2 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 4800 carries 2 GB. Quadro 3000M gives you 33.3% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the Quadro 3000M and 64-bit on the Quadro FX 4800. L2 Cache: 512 KB (Quadro 3000M) vs 192 KB (Quadro FX 4800) — the Quadro 3000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro 3000M	Quadro FX 4800
VRAM Capacity	2 GB+33%	1.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	512 KB+167%	192 KB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro 3000M draws 75W versus the Quadro FX 4800's 150W — a 66.7% difference. The Quadro 3000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro 3000M) vs 350W (Quadro FX 4800). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	Quadro 3000M	Quadro FX 4800
TDP	75W-50%	150W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Perf/Watt	13.3+99%	6.7

💰

Value Analysis

The newer card here is Quadro 3000M (2011 vs 2008).

Feature	Quadro 3000M	Quadro FX 4800
MSRP	—	$1799
Codename	GF104	GT200B
Release	February 22 2011	November 11 2008
Ranking	#888	#884

Search Quadro 3000M on Amazon

Search Quadro FX 4800 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.