AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 vs NVIDIA Quadro M3000M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains only one directly comparable benchmark between these two cards: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M delivers a score of 16646, while the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 manages 3977. The delta is a decisive 318.6% in favor of the NVIDIA part. This is not a marginal gap; it is a generational chasm in raw compute throughput as measured by the OpenCL workload.

To contextualize the Quadro M3000M's result, its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 4621, placing it at the 27th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M averages 4628 (0.1% ahead), the AMD Radeon R5 M320 averages 4657 (0.8% ahead), and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB also averages 4657 (0.8% ahead). The AMD Radeon R5 M230 trails slightly at 4577, a 1% deficit for the Quadro. This clustering suggests the M3000M sits in a competitive mid-range band, with no single rival dominating it by more than a fraction of a percent.

The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 3977, which places it at the 24th percentile. Its nearest rivals are all slightly behind it: the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 averages 3964 (0.3% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce 830M averages 3957 (0.5% behind), the AMD Radeon R5 M420 averages 3956 (0.5% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M averages 3953 (0.6% behind). The HD 6850 X2 is the top performer in its immediate cluster, but that cluster sits roughly 15% lower in average score than the M3000M's cluster.

Beyond the single head-to-head, the M3000M has a broader benchmark footprint in the database. It records scores across Passmark DirectX 9 (98), DirectX 10 (26), DirectX 11 (42), DirectX 12 (23), Passmark G2D (402), Passmark G3D (5543), and Passmark GPU Compute (2139). It also posts a Geekbench Vulkan score of 16668. The HD 6850 X2 has no recorded results in any of these additional tests, meaning the database cannot confirm its DirectX or Vulkan behavior. The only measurable comparison is the OpenCL test, and there the NVIDIA part wins outright.

The G3D score of 5543 for the M3000M is worth noting: it is the card's strongest Passmark result by a wide margin, indicating that traditional 3D rasterization workloads are where the card is most comfortable. The GPU Compute score of 2139 suggests compute-heavy tasks are comparatively weaker, but still more than double the HD 6850 X2's entire average benchmark score.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear overall winner: the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M. It wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark available, and it does so by 318.6%. Its average benchmark score of 4621 is 16.2% higher than the HD 6850 X2's 3977. Its percentile placement (27th versus 24th) is also higher, though both cards sit in the lower quarter of all GPUs in the database.

Who should pick the Quadro M3000M? Anyone prioritizing OpenCL compute performance, modern API support, or a mobile form factor. The card supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it far more future-proof in terms of software compatibility. It is an MXM module, draws 75 W, and requires no external power connectors, which makes it suitable for portable workstation deployments.

Who should pick the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2? Strictly on the recorded data, there is no benchmark category where it wins. It has a narrower API set (DirectX 11.2, OpenGL 4.4, no Vulkan), a higher power draw of 254 W, requires two 8-pin connectors, and needs a 600 W power supply. Its only advantage in the database is that it edges out its own nearest rivals in average score, but those rivals are all lower-tier parts. For a user constrained to that specific performance band, the HD 6850 X2 is the best of its immediate neighbors, but it cannot compete with the M3000M in any recorded metric.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural eras. The NVIDIA Quadro M3000M uses the GM204 chip based on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 5,200 million transistors into a 398 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.1 million per mm². The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 uses the Barts chip based on TeraScale 2 architecture, built on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 1,700 million transistors on a 255 mm² die, for a density of 6.7 million per mm². The NVIDIA part is newer, denser, and roughly three times larger in transistor count.

Compute resources differ significantly. The M3000M has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The HD 6850 X2 has 960 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The NVIDIA card's pixel rate is 29.57 GPixel/s versus 25.60 GPixel/s for AMD. Texture rate is 59.14 GTexel/s versus 38.40 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 1.892 TFLOPS versus 1.536 TFLOPS. The M3000M leads in every compute and fillrate metric.

Memory configurations are similar in bus width but different in capacity and speed. Both use GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The M3000M has 4 GB at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), yielding 160.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 6850 X2 has 2 GB at 1050 MHz (4.2 Gbps effective), yielding 134.4 GB/s. The NVIDIA card has double the capacity and 19.3% more bandwidth.

The M3000M's clocks are explicitly recorded: base 823 MHz, boost 924 MHz. The HD 6850 X2 has no base or boost clock listed in the database. Power delivery is another major divergence: the M3000M draws 75 W with no external power connectors, while the HD 6850 X2 draws 254 W and requires two 8-pin connectors. The HD 6850 X2 is a dual-slot card with a suggested 600 W power supply; the M3000M is an MXM module. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 3.0 x16 for NVIDIA versus PCIe 2.0 x16 for AMD.

Display outputs are portable-device dependent for the M3000M, while the HD 6850 X2 offers 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.1.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M3000M scores 16646 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 318.6% higher than the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2's 3977.

Q: How do these cards compare in average benchmark score?

A: The M3000M averages 4621 across all recorded tests, placing it at the 27th percentile. The HD 6850 X2 averages 3977, placing it at the 24th percentile.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to each card?

A: The M3000M's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M at 4628 (0.1% ahead). The HD 6850 X2's closest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 at 3964 (0.3% behind).

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: No. The M3000M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The HD 6850 X2 supports DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4, with no Vulkan support.

Q: How do their memory configurations differ?

A: The M3000M has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth. The HD 6850 X2 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 134.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The M3000M has 1024 shading units, while the HD 6850 X2 has 960.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro M3000M wins in every measurable category in the database. Its OpenCL score is 318.6% higher, its average score is higher, and its percentile rank is higher. It also holds advantages in shading units (1024 versus 960), TMUs (64 versus 48), pixel rate (29.57 GPixel/s versus 25.60 GPixel/s), texture rate (59.14 GTexel/s versus 38.40 GTexel/s), and FP32 throughput (1.892 TFLOPS versus 1.536 TFLOPS). Memory capacity is double at 4 GB versus 2 GB, and bandwidth is higher at 160.4 GB/s versus 134.4 GB/s.

The M3000M is the clear choice for compute-oriented OpenCL workloads, modern API compatibility (DirectX 12, Vulkan 1.4, OpenGL 4.6), and any scenario where power draw matters, since it consumes 75 W versus 254 W and requires no external power connectors. It is also the only one of the two with recorded Vulkan performance, scoring 16668 in Geekbench Vulkan.

The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 wins no recorded benchmark against the M3000M. Its only positive distinction in the database is that it outperforms its own nearest rivals: it is 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K2000, 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 830M, 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon R5 M420, and 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M. For a user whose performance ceiling is that cluster, the HD 6850 X2 is the top option. It also offers fixed display outputs (2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, 1x DisplayPort 1.1) rather than portable-device-dependent outputs, which may matter in a desktop configuration. Its dual-slot footprint and 600 W suggested power supply indicate it was designed for stationary systems, while the M3000M's MXM form factor targets mobile workstations.

In terms of use cases, the M3000M suits mobile workstation deployments, modern compute workloads, and any application that benefits from newer API support. The HD 6850 X2 suits legacy desktop builds where the user already has a 600 W power supply and is comfortable with the 254 W draw, and where the performance target is simply the best score among its immediate low-tier rivals. The database shows no scenario where the HD 6850 X2 outperforms the M3000M.