Quadro vs CMP 30HX
Quadro
Popular choices:
CMP 30HX
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 is positioned at rank 215 and the CMP 30HX is on rank 190, so the CMP 30HX offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro
Performance Per Dollar CMP 30HX
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The CMP 30HX is significantly newer (2021 vs 1999). The CMP 30HX likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the CMP 30HX.
| Insight | Quadro | CMP 30HX |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (1999 / Celsius (1999−2005)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $50 versus $60 for the CMP 30HX, it costs 17% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 22.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro | CMP 30HX |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+22.6%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($50) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($60) |
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 and CMP 30HX
Quadro
The Quadro is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in 1999. It features the Celsius architecture. The core clock speed is 135 MHz. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 220 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,000 points.
CMP 30HX
The CMP 30HX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 25 2021. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1530 MHz to 1785 MHz. It has 1408 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 125W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,892 points. Launch price was $799.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro scores 5,000 and the CMP 30HX reaches 4,892 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro is built on Celsius while the CMP 30HX uses Turing, both on 220 nm vs 12 nm.
| Feature | Quadro | CMP 30HX |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,000+2% | 4,892 |
| Architecture | Celsius | Turing |
| Process Node | 220 nm | 12 nm |
| ROPs | 4 | 48+1100% |
| TMUs | 4 | 88+2100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro | CMP 30HX |
|---|---|---|
| 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 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Quadro | CMP 30HX |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
Display & API Support
Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 0.
| Feature | Quadro | CMP 30HX |
|---|---|---|
| Max Displays | 1 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (Quadro) vs No (CMP 30HX). Decoder: MPEG-2 Acceleration vs No.
| Feature | Quadro | CMP 30HX |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | No |
| Decoder | MPEG-2 Acceleration | No |
| Codecs | MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro draws 75W versus the CMP 30HX's 125W — a 50% difference. The Quadro is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro) vs 350W (CMP 30HX). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro | CMP 30HX |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-40% | 125W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 229mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 66.7+71% | 39.1 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro launched at $1000 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the CMP 30HX launched at $799 and now averages $60. The Quadro costs 16.7% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 100.0 (Quadro) vs 81.5 (CMP 30HX) — the Quadro offers 22.7% better value. The CMP 30HX is the newer GPU (2021 vs 1999).
| Feature | Quadro | CMP 30HX |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1000 | $799-20% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50-17% | $60 |
| Performance per Dollar | 100.0+23% | 81.5 |
| Codename | NV10 | TU116 |
| Release | 1999 | February 25 2021 |
| Ranking | #900 | #447 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro and CMP 30HX
