
Quadro M3000M vs GeForce GTX 690

Quadro M3000M
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 690
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 M3000M is positioned at rank #9 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Excellent 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 M3000M
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro M3000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.7% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 690.
| Insight | Quadro M3000M | GeForce GTX 690 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | Standard Size (279mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro M3000M 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 M3000M and GeForce GTX 690

Quadro M3000M
The Quadro M3000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 18 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 1050 MHz. It has 1,024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,574 points.

GeForce GTX 690
The GeForce GTX 690 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 3 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 915 MHz to 1019 MHz. It has 3072 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 300W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,536 points. Launch price was $999.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro M3000M scores 5,574 and the GeForce GTX 690 reaches 5,536 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M3000M is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 690 uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1 (Quadro M3000M) vs 3,072 (GeForce GTX 690). Raw compute: 2.15 TFLOPS (Quadro M3000M) vs 3.13 TFLOPS ×2 (GeForce GTX 690).
| Feature | Quadro M3000M | GeForce GTX 690 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,574 | 5,536 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1,024 | 3072 ×2+200% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.15 TFLOPS | 3.13 TFLOPS ×2+46% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 ×2 |
| TMUs | 64 | 128 ×2+100% |
| L1 Cache | 384 KB+200% | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro M3000M | GeForce GTX 690 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 M3000M comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 690 has 2 GB. The Quadro M3000M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit x2. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Quadro M3000M) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce GTX 690) — the Quadro M3000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro M3000M | GeForce GTX 690 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit x2+100% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (Quadro M3000M) vs 12_0 (GeForce GTX 690). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro M3000M | GeForce GTX 690 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12_0 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 3rd Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M3000M) vs NVENC 1st Gen (GeForce GTX 690). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP6 vs VP5.
| Feature | Quadro M3000M | GeForce GTX 690 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 3rd Gen NVENC (Maxwell) | NVENC 1st Gen |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP6 | VP5 |
| Codecs | H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Decode Only) | — |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro M3000M draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 690's 300W — a 120% difference. The Quadro M3000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M3000M) vs 650W (GeForce GTX 690). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 2x 8-pin.
| Feature | Quadro M3000M | GeForce GTX 690 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-75% | 300W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-46% | 650W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 2x 8-pin |
| Length | — | 279mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 74.3+302% | 18.5 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro M3000M is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2012).
| Feature | Quadro M3000M | GeForce GTX 690 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $999 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $45 |
| Codename | GM204 | GK104 |
| Release | August 18 2015 | May 3 2012 |
| Ranking | #411 | #414 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















