Quadro K3100M vs FirePro D500
Quadro K3100M
Popular choices:
FirePro D500
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 K3100M is positioned at rank 48 and the FirePro D500 is on rank 226, so the Quadro K3100M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K3100M
Performance Per Dollar FirePro D500
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro K3100M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.5% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FirePro D500.
| Insight | Quadro K3100M | FirePro D500 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.5%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | Standard Size (279mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro D500 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro D500 holds the technical lead. Priced at $150 (vs $400), it costs 63% less, resulting in a 165.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro K3100M | FirePro D500 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+165.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($400) | ✅More affordable ($150) |
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 K3100M and FirePro D500
Quadro K3100M
The Quadro K3100M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 706 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,283 points. Launch price was $1,999.
FirePro D500
The FirePro D500 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 18 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 725 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 274W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,272 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro K3100M scores 2,283 and the FirePro D500 reaches 2,272 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K3100M is built on Kepler while the FirePro D500 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 768 (Quadro K3100M) vs 1,536 (FirePro D500). Raw compute: 1.084 TFLOPS (Quadro K3100M) vs 2.227 TFLOPS (FirePro D500).
| Feature | Quadro K3100M | FirePro D500 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,283 | 2,272 |
| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 1536+100% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.084 TFLOPS | 2.227 TFLOPS+105% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 64 | 96+50% |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 384 KB+500% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 768 KB+50% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K3100M | FirePro D500 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (Quadro K3100M) vs 768 KB (FirePro D500) — the FirePro D500 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro K3100M | FirePro D500 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 768 KB+50% |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K3100M draws 75W versus the FirePro D500's 274W — a 114% difference. The Quadro K3100M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K3100M) vs 350W (FirePro D500). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro K3100M | FirePro D500 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-73% | 274W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 279mm |
| Slots | — | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 30.4+266% | 8.3 |
Value Analysis
The FirePro D500 costs 62.5% less ($250 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 5.7 (Quadro K3100M) vs 15.1 (FirePro D500) — the FirePro D500 offers 164.9% better value. The FirePro D500 is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2013).
| Feature | Quadro K3100M | FirePro D500 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $500 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $400 | $150-63% |
| Performance per Dollar | 5.7 | 15.1+165% |
| Codename | GK104 | Tahiti |
| Release | July 23 2013 | January 18 2014 |
| Ranking | #653 | #484 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro K3100M and FirePro D500
