Quadro M3000M vs Radeon R9 280

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.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro M3000M

#1

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

186%

#9

Quadro M3000M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro M3000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.8% higher G3D Mark score and 33.3% more VRAM (4 GB vs 3 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 280.

Insight	Quadro M3000M	Radeon R9 280
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+0.8%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+33.3%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	—

💎 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.

Quadro M3000M Benchmark Check

Radeon R9 280 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Quadro M3000M and Radeon R9 280

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.

Radeon R9 280

The Radeon R9 280 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 4 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 933 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,532 points. Launch price was $279.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro M3000M scores 5,574 and the Radeon R9 280 reaches 5,532 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M3000M is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Radeon R9 280 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1 (Quadro M3000M) vs 1,792 (Radeon R9 280). Raw compute: 2.15 TFLOPS (Quadro M3000M) vs 3.344 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 280).

Feature	Quadro M3000M	Radeon R9 280
G3D Mark Score	5,574	5,532
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0	GCN 1.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1,024	1792+75%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.15 TFLOPS	3.344 TFLOPS+56%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64	112+75%
L1 Cache	384 KB	448 KB+17%
L2 Cache	2 MB+167%	0.75 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro M3000M	Radeon R9 280
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro M3000M comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 280 has 3 GB. The Quadro M3000M offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Quadro M3000M) vs 0.75 MB (Radeon R9 280) — the Quadro M3000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro M3000M	Radeon R9 280
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+33%	3 GB
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit	384-bit+200%
L2 Cache	2 MB+167%	0.75 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro M3000M draws 75W versus the Radeon R9 280's 200W — a 90.9% difference. The Quadro M3000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M3000M) vs 500W (Radeon R9 280). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 6-pin + 8-pin.