
Quadro K2100M vs FirePro M40003

Quadro K2100M
Popular choices:

FirePro M40003
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 Quadro K2100M is positioned at rank 108 and the FirePro M40003 is on rank 151, so the Quadro K2100M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K2100M
Performance Per Dollar FirePro M40003
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro K2100M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.4% higher G3D Mark score. However, the FirePro M40003 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro K2100M | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.4%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro K2100M 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro K2100M and FirePro M40003

Quadro K2100M
The Quadro K2100M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 667 MHz. It has 576 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,370 points. Launch price was $84.95.

FirePro M40003
The FirePro M40003 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 27 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 675 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,364 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro K2100M scores 1,370 and the FirePro M40003 reaches 1,364 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K2100M is built on Kepler while the FirePro M40003 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 576 (Quadro K2100M) vs 512 (FirePro M40003). Raw compute: 0.7684 TFLOPS (Quadro K2100M) vs 0.6912 TFLOPS (FirePro M40003).
| Feature | Quadro K2100M | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,370 | 1,364 |
| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 576+13% | 512 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7684 TFLOPS+11% | 0.6912 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 48+50% | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 48 KB | 128 KB+167% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K2100M | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Quadro K2100M comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the FirePro M40003 has 4 GB. The FirePro M40003 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Quadro K2100M | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (Quadro K2100M) vs 12 (FirePro M40003). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 6.
| Feature | Quadro K2100M | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 6+50% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 1st Gen NVENC (Quadro K2100M) vs VCE 1.0 (FirePro M40003). Decoder: 1st Gen NVDEC (VP5) vs UVD 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Quadro K2100M) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (FirePro M40003).
| Feature | Quadro K2100M | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 1st Gen NVENC | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | 1st Gen NVDEC (VP5) | UVD 4.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K2100M draws 55W versus the FirePro M40003's 33W — a 50% difference. The FirePro M40003 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K2100M) vs 350W (FirePro M40003). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | Quadro K2100M | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 55W | 33W-40% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 82mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 75°C-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 24.9 | 41.3+66% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro K2100M is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2012).
| Feature | Quadro K2100M | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $150 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $72 |
| Codename | GK106 | Chelsea |
| Release | July 23 2013 | June 27 2012 |
| Ranking | #788 | #752 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












