AMD Radeon R5 M430 vs NVIDIA Quadro K3000M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are unambiguous. The AMD Radeon R5 M430 scores 5152, while the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M scores 4241. That works out to a 21.5% advantage for the AMD part, which is a meaningful gap in compute workloads. In practical terms, if you are running OpenCL-accelerated tasks such as video encoding filters, physics simulations, or certain rendering plugins, the R5 M430 should finish the job noticeably faster.

The disparity becomes even clearer when you place both cards against their own nearest rivals. The R5 M430 sits at the 30th percentile of all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 5018. Its closest competitors are the AMD FirePro W4170M at 5034 (0.3% higher), the AMD Radeon R7 M340 at 5063 (0.9% higher), and the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics at 4998 (0.4% lower). The R5 M430 is essentially trading punches with those parts, all within a 1% band. The NVIDIA Quadro K3000M, by contrast, sits at the 25th percentile with an average score of 4241. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Vega 3 at 4268 (0.6% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M at 4282 (1% higher), and the AMD FirePro W2100 at 4295 (1.3% higher). The Quadro is also competitive with its immediate peers, but those peers are all operating at a lower performance tier than the R5 M430's peer group.

What this means in the head-to-head context is simple: the R5 M430 wins the only measured contest, and it does so by a margin large enough that the Quadro cannot close the gap through any architectural trickery. The 21.5% delta is not a rounding error or a driver anomaly; it reflects a real difference in raw compute throughput between these two mobile graphics solutions. The Quadro's single benchmark score of 4241 is also its only recorded result, so there is no second data point to suggest it performs better in other API workloads. The database records exactly one win for the AMD part and zero for the NVIDIA part.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M430 wins the compute-focused OpenCL benchmark outright, which makes it the better choice for any workload that relies on general-purpose GPU computing. The database shows its Geekbench Vulkan score at 4884, which is not directly compared to the Quadro (the Quadro has no Vulkan score recorded), but it does indicate that the R5 M430 has a functional and competitive Vulkan path. If you are running applications that use Vulkan for rendering or compute, the AMD card has a measurable capability in that area. The Quadro K3000M has no Vulkan benchmark result in the database, so its Vulkan performance is unknown, but its API support does include Vulkan 1.2.175, which is a slightly newer version than the R5 M430's 1.2.170.

For traditional graphics workloads, the data is thinner. The Quadro K3000M has a higher pixel rate (7.848 GPixel/s versus 6.840 GPixel/s) and a much higher texture rate (31.39 GTexel/s versus 17.10 GTexel/s). It also has more shading units (576 versus 320), more texture mapping units (48 versus 20), and more render output units (32 versus 8). These hardware specifications suggest the Quadro should handle rasterization-heavy tasks, such as CAD viewport rendering or OpenGL-based visualization, more smoothly than the R5 M430. The Quadro's FP32 throughput is also higher at 753.4 GFLOPS, compared to 547.2 GFLOPS for the AMD part. So while the R5 M430 wins the OpenCL benchmark, the Quadro has a structural advantage in raw graphics throughput that the benchmark does not capture.

The practical split is therefore: choose the R5 M430 for OpenCL compute and for Vulkan-capable applications, where its measured scores are strong. Choose the Quadro K3000M for traditional graphics pipelines, especially those that are geometry-heavy or rely on high texture fill rates. The Quadro's 256-bit memory bus and GDDR5 memory (89.60 GB/s bandwidth) versus the R5 M430's 64-bit bus and DDR3 memory (16.00 GB/s) also point to the NVIDIA card being far better at feeding large textures and complex scenes. The AMD card's 4 GB frame buffer is double the Quadro's 2 GB, which helps with large datasets in compute workloads, but the memory bandwidth difference is stark.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from completely different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon R5 M430 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture, built on a chip codenamed Jet. The NVIDIA Quadro K3000M uses the Kepler architecture, built on the GK104 chip. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, so the underlying fabrication technology is identical. The similarities end there.

The AMD chip packs 690 million transistors onto a 56 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip is far larger: 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a density of 12.0 million per square millimeter. The die size difference is enormous, nearly 5.25 times larger for the Quadro, and it reflects a much more complex GPU with more functional units. The Quadro has 576 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The R5 M430 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. In every count, the NVIDIA part has more hardware, which explains its higher pixel and texture rates despite a lower clock speed. The R5 M430 runs at a base clock of 780 MHz and a boost of 855 MHz, while the Quadro runs at a flat 654 MHz with no boost. The AMD card's higher clocks help it in compute tasks, but the Quadro's wider execution resources win in fill-rate-bound scenarios.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The R5 M430 uses 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro K3000M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 89.60 GB/s of bandwidth. That is a 5.6-fold bandwidth advantage for the Quadro. For any workload that streams large amounts of data, such as high-resolution textures or multi-sample anti-aliasing, the Quadro has a decisive edge. The R5 M430's larger capacity is useful for compute kernels that need to hold big buffers in VRAM, but the narrow bus severely limits how fast those buffers can be read and written.

The power and form factor also differ. The Quadro K3000M is rated at 75 W TDP and comes as an MXM Module with no power connectors. The R5 M430 has no TDP listed in the database and is described as an IGP, meaning it is integrated into the motherboard or processor package. The R5 M430 uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface, while the Quadro uses MXM-B (3.0). Both have portable-device-dependent display outputs, so external connectivity is not a differentiator. API support is close: both support DirectX 12 (the AMD at version 11_1, the NVIDIA at 11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan (1.2.170 for AMD, 1.2.175 for NVIDIA). The NVIDIA part has a higher Vulkan version, but the AMD part has a higher DirectX feature level.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M430 has an average benchmark score of 5018, while the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M has an average score of 4241. The R5 M430 also sits at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the Quadro's 25th percentile.

Q: Is the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M better at anything?

A: Yes. The Quadro has higher pixel rate (7.848 GPixel/s versus 6.840 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (31.39 GTexel/s versus 17.10 GTexel/s), higher FP32 throughput (753.4 GFLOPS versus 547.2 GFLOPS), and far higher memory bandwidth (89.60 GB/s versus 16.00 GB/s). It also has more shading units, TMUs, and ROPs.

Q: Why does the AMD card win the OpenCL benchmark if the NVIDIA card has more hardware?

A: The Geekbench OpenCL score reflects compute performance in a specific workload. The R5 M430 scores 5152 versus the Quadro's 4241, a 21.5% difference. The AMD card's higher clock speeds (780 MHz base, 855 MHz boost versus a flat 654 MHz) and its GCN architecture likely contribute to better OpenCL efficiency despite having fewer execution units.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M430 has 4 GB of DDR3 memory, while the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory. The Quadro has a wider 256-bit bus and higher bandwidth, but the AMD card has double the capacity.

Q: Which card supports newer APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. So the AMD has a higher DirectX feature level, while the NVIDIA has a slightly newer Vulkan version.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life. The AMD R5 M430 has no release date recorded, while the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M was released on 2012-05-31.

The Verdict

The data points in one direction for compute and another for traditional graphics. If your priority is OpenCL performance, the AMD Radeon R5 M430 is the clear winner. Its 5152 OpenCL score beats the Quadro's 4241 by 21.5%, and its Vulkan score of 4884 shows it is also capable in modern compute APIs. The R5 M430 also sits higher in the overall GPU percentile ranking (30th versus 25th), meaning its average performance is closer to the middle of the pack.

If your priority is raw graphics throughput, the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M has the structural advantages. Its 753.4 GFLOPS FP32 rate, 31.39 GTexel/s texture rate, and 89.60 GB/s memory bandwidth are all significantly higher than the AMD part's corresponding figures. The Quadro is also the only one of the two with a recorded TDP (75 W), making it a known quantity for system power planning. The R5 M430 has no TDP listed, which introduces uncertainty for mobile builds.

For a user running CAD, 3D modeling, or OpenGL-based visualization, the Quadro K3000M is the safer choice based on its fill rates and memory bandwidth. For a user running OpenCL compute tasks, video processing, or Vulkan workloads, the R5 M430 is the better performer according to the benchmark results. Neither card is a modern part; both are end-of-life products. But among these two legacy mobile GPUs, the choice comes down to workload: compute favors AMD, rasterization favors NVIDIA.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R5 M430 | NVIDIA Quadro K3000M |

|---|---|---|

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 690 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 56 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.3M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 780 MHz | 654 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 855 MHz | 654 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) | 700 MHz (2.8 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 16.00 GB/s | 89.60 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 320 | 576 |

| TMUs | 20 | 48 |

| ROPs | 8 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 6.840 GPixel/s | 7.848 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 17.10 GTexel/s | 31.39 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 547.2 GFLOPS | 753.4 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not listed | 75 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.2.175 |

| Release Date | Not listed | 2012-05-31 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

| Predecessor | Solar System | Quadro Fermi-M |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | Quadro Maxwell-M |