AMD Radeon R7 Graphics vs NVIDIA Quadro K3000M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The available benchmark data separates these two mobile graphics solutions cleanly, albeit with only one shared test. The NVIDIA Quadro K3000M takes the single recorded head-to-head victory, winning the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 4241 against the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics' 4015. That margin works out to a 5.3% lead for the Quadro K3000M in this compute workload.

The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics, as an integrated processor graphics solution, does not win any of the recorded head-to-head comparisons. However, the broader database shows the R7 Graphics with a second benchmark result in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 5980. The Quadro K3000M has no Vulkan result recorded, so in that specific API workload the AMD part stands alone. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests sits at 4998, while the Quadro K3000M's average is 4241, reflecting that Vulkan result lifting the AMD IGP's overall standing.

Positioning within the database's percentile rankings tells a similar story, with the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics landing at the 29th percentile of all GPUs and the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M at the 25th percentile. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 (0.4% behind), the AMD Radeon R5 M430 (0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB (0.6% behind), and the AMD FirePro W4170M (0.7% ahead). The Quadro K3000M's closest competition is the AMD Radeon Vega 3 (0.6% ahead of it), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M (1.0% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (1.2% behind), and the AMD FirePro W2100 (1.3% ahead). These tight deltas place both parts in a crowded mid-low performance band where small percentage differences separate adjacent products.

The use-case split is therefore straightforward: the Quadro K3000M wins the only directly comparable compute benchmark, while the Radeon R7 Graphics offers broader API support with its Vulkan score that has no counterpart in the Quadro's recorded data.

The Verdict

The data points to different buyers for each part. The NVIDIA Quadro K3000M is the choice when OpenCL compute performance is the priority, since it outperforms the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics by 5.3% in that specific benchmark. Its discrete memory configuration with 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 89.60 GB/s of bandwidth, gives it a structural advantage for workloads that need dedicated video memory rather than borrowing from system RAM.

The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics suits scenarios where the GPU is integrated into the processor package and separate graphics hardware is not an option. Its Vulkan score of 5980 indicates stronger performance in that API than its OpenCL result would suggest, and the database shows it supporting DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Quadro K3000M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175, so the AMD part has a higher DirectX feature level.

Neither part is current production silicon; both are marked end-of-life in the database. The Radeon R7 Graphics released in February 2014, while the Quadro K3000M came earlier in May 2012. The AMD part belongs to the GCN 2.0 architecture family, specifically the Kaveri integrated graphics generation, while the Quadro K3000M is Kepler-based from the Quadro Kx000M mobile workstation line. For a system builder constrained to a 25 W power envelope, the Radeon R7 Graphics fits an IGP form factor. For a mobile workstation module with a 75 W budget, the Quadro K3000M provides its performance in an MXM form factor. The recorded data offers no price information, so any purchasing decision must rest on benchmark performance and system compatibility rather than cost considerations.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single shared benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA Quadro K3000M scored 4241, and the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics scored 4015. The delta is 5.3% in favor of the Quadro, which is a meaningful but not overwhelming margin in compute workloads. Both parts sit in a performance tier where their nearest rivals are within roughly one percentage point, so this 5.3% gap represents a solid differentiator between the two.

The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics does have its Geekbench Vulkan result of 5980, which is notably higher than its OpenCL score. That Vulkan number is 49% above its own OpenCL score, suggesting the GCN 2.0 architecture's compute capabilities express themselves differently depending on the API. The Quadro K3000M has no Vulkan score in the database, so a direct comparison in that API is not possible from recorded data.

Looking at each card's nearest rivals clarifies the competitive landscape. The Radeon R7 Graphics' average score of 4998 places it 0.4% above the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 (4979), 0.4% below the AMD Radeon R5 M430 (5018), 0.6% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB (4970), and 0.7% below the AMD FirePro W4170M (5034). These are all essentially ties within measurement noise, confirming the R7 Graphics sits in a dense pack of similar-performing GPUs. The Quadro K3000M's average of 4241 places it 0.6% below the AMD Radeon Vega 3 (4268), 1.0% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M (4282), 1.2% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (4193), and 1.3% below the AMD FirePro W2100 (4295). Again, the deltas are small, but the Quadro does sit at the lower end of its rival cluster.

The biggest win in the head-to-head data is therefore the Quadro K3000M's 5.3% OpenCL advantage. The biggest win for the AMD part is its Vulkan score, which has no direct comparison but demonstrates higher throughput in that API than in OpenCL.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only shared benchmark between these two?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K3000M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 4241 against the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics' 4015, a 5.3% lead.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics have any benchmark where it outperforms the Quadro K3000M?

A: The database has no shared Vulkan benchmark. The Radeon R7 Graphics scores 5980 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Quadro K3000M has no recorded Vulkan result, so no direct comparison exists for that API.

Q: How do these GPUs rank against all other GPUs in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics sits at the 29th percentile of all GPUs, and the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M sits at the 25th percentile.

Q: What are the closest competitors to each of these GPUs?

A: For the Radeon R7 Graphics, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 (0.4% lower score), AMD Radeon R5 M430 (0.4% higher), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB (0.6% lower), and AMD FirePro W4170M (0.7% higher). For the Quadro K3000M, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Vega 3 (0.6% higher), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M (1.0% higher), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (1.2% lower), and AMD FirePro W2100 (1.3% higher).

Q: Which GPU has a higher DirectX feature level?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The AMD part has the higher feature level.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs use?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 89.60 GB/s bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers and different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics uses the Spectre Lite chip built on GCN 2.0 architecture, part of the Kaveri integrated graphics processor generation. The NVIDIA Quadro K3000M uses the GK104 chip on the Kepler architecture, belonging to the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx000M) mobile workstation line. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process, but AMD uses GlobalFoundries while NVIDIA uses TSMC.

Transistor counts and die sizes differ substantially. The AMD chip packs 2,410 million transistors on a 245 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 9.8 million per mm². The NVIDIA chip contains 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, for a density of 12.0 million per mm². The Quadro's larger transistor budget and denser packing reflect its discrete design with more execution resources.

The Radeon R7 Graphics integrates its GPU into the processor package, with system-shared memory and a 25 W TDP. The Quadro K3000M is a discrete MXM module with a 75 W TDP, no power connectors required, and its own dedicated GDDR5 memory. These form-factor differences dictate where each part can be used: the AMD IGP fits in motherboards with integrated graphics support, while the NVIDIA module fits in portable devices with MXM slots.

Memory architecture is a fundamental split. The AMD part has no dedicated VRAM, relying on system RAM with bandwidth described as system dependent. The Quadro has 2 GB of GDDR5 across a 256-bit bus, providing 89.60 GB/s of bandwidth. This gives the Quadro a predictable memory performance profile, whereas the AMD IGP's memory throughput varies with the host system's RAM configuration.

Shader resources also differ. The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. The NVIDIA Quadro K3000M has 576 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. These higher counts translate into the Quadro's advantage in pixel rate (7.848 GPixel/s vs. 5.760 GPixel/s) and texture rate (31.39 GTexel/s vs. 17.28 GTexel/s). Floating-point performance follows the same pattern: the Quadro delivers 753.4 GFLOPS FP32, while the AMD part delivers 553.0 GFLOPS.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ across nearly every measurable specification. The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics has a base and boost clock that are not recorded, with system-shared memory operating at system-dependent speeds. The NVIDIA Quadro K3000M has a base clock of 654 MHz and a boost clock of 654 MHz, with memory running at 700 MHz (2.8 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity, type, bus width, and bandwidth all differ: the AMD part uses system-shared memory with no dedicated capacity, while the Quadro has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 89.60 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, while the Quadro K3000M has 576 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Pixel rate is 5.760 GPixel/s for the AMD part versus 7.848 GPixel/s for the Quadro. Texture rate is 17.28 GTexel/s versus 31.39 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 553.0 GFLOPS for the AMD part versus 753.4 GFLOPS for the Quadro.

Power consumption differs by a factor of three: the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics draws 25 W, while the Quadro K3000M draws 75 W. Form factor and bus interface also differ, with the AMD part being an IGP with an IGP bus interface, and the Quadro being an MXM module with an MXM-B (3.0) interface. Display outputs are motherboard dependent for the AMD part and portable-device dependent for the Quadro. The API support shows the AMD part with DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the Quadro has DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The AMD part has the higher DirectX feature level, while the Quadro has a slightly newer Vulkan revision.

Release dates differ by nearly two years, with the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics released in February 2014 and the Quadro K3000M in May 2012. Both are end-of-life products. The AMD part's predecessor is TeraScale 3 IGP and its successor is GCN 3.0 IGP, while the Quadro's predecessor is Quadro Fermi-M and its successor is Quadro Maxwell-M.