Quadro K3100M vs GeForce GTX 460
Quadro K3100M
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 460
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. The Quadro K3100M is positioned at rank #48 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Great cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K3100M
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro K3100M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.4% higher G3D Mark score and 433.3% more VRAM (4 GB vs 768 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 460.
| Insight | Quadro K3100M | GeForce GTX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.4%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+433.3%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 460 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 460 holds the technical lead. Priced at $25 (vs $400), it costs 94% less, resulting in a 1494.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro K3100M | GeForce GTX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1494.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($400) | ✅More affordable ($25) |
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 GeForce GTX 460
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.
GeForce GTX 460
The GeForce GTX 460 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 12 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 675 MHz. It has 336 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 160W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,275 points. Launch price was $229.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro K3100M scores 2,283 and the GeForce GTX 460 reaches 2,275 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K3100M is built on Kepler while the GeForce GTX 460 uses Fermi, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 768 (Quadro K3100M) vs 336 (GeForce GTX 460). Raw compute: 1.084 TFLOPS (Quadro K3100M) vs 0.9072 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 460).
| Feature | Quadro K3100M | GeForce GTX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,283 | 2,275 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Fermi |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 768+129% | 336 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.084 TFLOPS+19% | 0.9072 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 64+14% | 56 |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 448 KB+600% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K3100M | GeForce GTX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro K3100M comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 460 has 768 MB. The Quadro K3100M offers 433.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | Quadro K3100M | GeForce GTX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+433% | 0.75 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K3100M draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 460's 160W — a 72.3% difference. The Quadro K3100M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K3100M) vs 450W (GeForce GTX 460). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 2x 6-pin.
| Feature | Quadro K3100M | GeForce GTX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-53% | 160W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-22% | 450W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 2x 6-pin |
| Perf/Watt | 30.4+114% | 14.2 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 460 costs 93.8% less ($375 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 5.7 (Quadro K3100M) vs 91.0 (GeForce GTX 460) — the GeForce GTX 460 offers 1496.5% better value. The Quadro K3100M is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2010).
| Feature | Quadro K3100M | GeForce GTX 460 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $199 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $400 | $25-94% |
| Performance per Dollar | 5.7 | 91.0+1496% |
| Codename | GK104 | GF104 |
| Release | July 23 2013 | July 12 2010 |
| Ranking | #653 | #652 |
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 GeForce GTX 460
