AMD Radeon R7 M365X vs NVIDIA Quadro K3100M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly along API boundaries. The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M wins both head-to-head tests, but the margin tells different stories. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro K3100M scores 6154 against the Radeon R7 M365X’s 5939, a 3.5% advantage. That is a close race — well within the sort of variance you might see from driver updates or thermal behavior on mobile parts. The Vulkan gap is wider: 5484 versus 4893, a 10.8% lead for NVIDIA. If your workload leans on Vulkan compute, the Quadro is the clear pick.

But the Radeon R7 M365X is not without its own territory. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 5416, which actually sits 5.1% above the Quadro’s 5154 average. That discrepancy is worth unpacking: the Radeon only has two benchmark results in the pack (OpenCL and Vulkan), while the Quadro has three (adding Metal, where it scores 3823). The Quadro’s Metal result drags down its average, but if you never touch Metal, that number is irrelevant. The Radeon’s percentile ranking is also higher at 32 versus 30, meaning it places ahead of a slightly larger share of all GPUs in the database.

Where each one wins depends on what you are running. The Quadro K3100M wins on raw compute throughput in both shared test categories. The Radeon R7 M365X wins on consistency across its tested API surface — it posts 5939 in OpenCL and 4893 in Vulkan, a 21.4% drop between the two, whereas the Quadro drops from 6154 to 5484, a 10.9% decline. The NVIDIA part is more stable across API translations. However, the Radeon’s OpenCL score is only 3.5% behind the Quadro’s, so if your software uses OpenCL exclusively, the practical difference is small.

The Verdict

Pick the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M if your work is Vulkan-heavy or if you want the higher peak compute scores. The data shows a 10.8% lead in Vulkan and a 3.5% lead in OpenCL, both in NVIDIA’s favor. The Quadro also brings a larger memory footprint — 4 GB versus 1 GB — which matters if your datasets exceed the Radeon’s capacity. For professional mobile workstations, the Quadro’s 75 W TDP and MXM-B interface suggest it is designed for sustained duty in a docking or laptop environment.

Pick the AMD Radeon R7 M365X if you are optimizing for average performance across mixed API loads or if you want the higher percentile placement. Its 5416 average beats the Quadro’s 5154 by 5.1%, and its 32nd percentile versus 30th means it edges out slightly more of the GPU field. The Radeon also has a more modern API baseline: DirectX 12 (11_1) versus the Quadro’s DirectX 12 (11_0), plus Vulkan 1.2.170 versus 1.2.175 — a negligible difference, but the Radeon’s DX12 feature level is one notch higher. If you are pairing this with an AMD CPU in a lightweight chassis, the Radeon’s 28 nm process and 950 million transistors make it a simpler, cooler-running part than NVIDIA’s 3,540 million transistor monster.

The verdict is not a knockout. It is a question of which benchmark you trust. For Vulkan compute, the Quadro wins by a meaningful margin. For everything else, the Radeon’s average score suggests it is the safer all-rounder.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The first head-to-head test is Geekbench OpenCL. NVIDIA Quadro K3100M scores 6154, AMD Radeon R7 M365X scores 5939. That is a 3.5% delta in NVIDIA’s favor. To put that in context, look at the Quadro’s nearest rivals: it sits 1.8% above the AMD Radeon R7 240 and 1.6% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M. The Radeon R7 M365X, by contrast, is 0.5% below the AMD Radeon 610M and 0.9% above the Intel UHD Graphics P630. Neither card is breaking away from its peer group; the 3.5% gap between them is roughly the same size as the gaps to their nearest neighbors. In OpenCL, these two are essentially in the same performance tier.

The second test is Geekbench Vulkan. The Quadro K3100M scores 5484, the Radeon R7 M365X scores 4893. That is a 10.8% delta — a much more decisive separation. The Radeon’s Vulkan score is 17.6% lower than its own OpenCL score, which suggests the GCN 1.0 architecture does not translate its compute power to Vulkan as efficiently. The Quadro’s Vulkan score is 10.9% lower than its OpenCL score, a smaller penalty. If your application is built on Vulkan, the NVIDIA part is the one to buy.

The wins are 2-0 for NVIDIA in direct comparison. But the Radeon’s average benchmark score of 5416 versus the Quadro’s 5154 flips the narrative when you include the Metal test. The Quadro’s Metal score of 3823 is 29.7% below its OpenCL score, a massive drop that pulls its average down. The Radeon has no Metal result, so its average is computed only from OpenCL and Vulkan, where it is more competitive. This is a classic case of benchmark selection bias — include Metal, and the Radeon looks better; exclude it, and the Quadro wins.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M365X averages 5416 across its tests, while the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M averages 5154. The Radeon leads by 5.1%, but that includes the Quadro’s weaker Metal result.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap in the head-to-head tests?

A: The Geekbench Vulkan test shows the largest gap: NVIDIA Quadro K3100M scores 5484 versus AMD Radeon R7 M365X’s 4893, a 10.8% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Radeon R7 M365X is 0.5% below the AMD Radeon 610M and 0.9% above the Intel UHD Graphics P630. The Quadro K3100M is 1.8% above the AMD Radeon R7 240 and 1.6% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M.

Q: Which card has better DirectX support?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M365X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The Radeon’s feature level is one notch higher.

Q: Is the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M better in OpenCL?

A: Yes, but only slightly. The Quadro scores 6154 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the Radeon’s 5939, a 3.5% margin. Both cards are within the same performance tier as their nearest rivals.

Q: What is the memory difference between these two?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon R7 M365X has 1 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R7 M365X is built on GCN 1.0 architecture with a chip codenamed Litho. It packs 950 million transistors onto a 77 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M uses Kepler architecture with a GK104 chip, containing 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, for a density of 12.0 million per square millimeter. Both are fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm process, but the NVIDIA chip is 3.7 times larger in die area and holds 3.7 times more transistors.

The compute resources differ dramatically. The Quadro K3100M has 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Radeon R7 M365X has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. That means NVIDIA has exactly double the shading units, 2.7 times the TMUs, and 4 times the ROPs. The Quadro’s pixel rate is 11.30 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s for the Radeon, and its texture rate is 45.18 GTexel/s versus 19.80 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 1,084.4 GFLOPS for the Quadro and 633.6 GFLOPS for the Radeon — a 71.2% advantage for NVIDIA.

The memory subsystems also diverge. The Quadro K3100M uses a 256-bit bus with 4 GB of GDDR5 and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon R7 M365X uses a 128-bit bus with 1 GB of GDDR5 and 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro runs its memory at 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective), while the Radeon runs at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The Radeon’s faster clock partially compensates for the narrower bus, but the Quadro still delivers 60% more bandwidth.

Both cards are end-of-life products. The Radeon R7 M365X is from the Gem System (R7 M300) generation, released May 2015, with a predecessor of Solar System and successor of Polaris Mobile. The Quadro K3100M is from the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M) generation, released July 2013, with a predecessor of Quadro Fermi-M and successor of Quadro Maxwell-M. The Radeon is two years newer.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where these two GPUs differ.

| Specification | AMD Radeon R7 M365X | NVIDIA Quadro K3100M |

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

| Manufacturer | AMD | NVIDIA |

| Chip | Litho | GK104 |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |

| Generation | Gem System (R7 M300) | Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M) |

| Transistors | 950 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 77 mm² | 294 mm² |

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

| Base Clock | — | 706 MHz |

| Boost Clock | — | 706 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) | 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 768 |

| TMUs | 24 | 64 |

| ROPs | 8 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 6.600 GPixel/s | 11.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 19.80 GTexel/s | 45.18 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 633.6 GFLOPS | 1,084.4 GFLOPS |

| TDP | — | 75 W |

| Slot Width | — | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | — | None |

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

| Display Outputs | — | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.2.175 |

| Release Date | 2015-05-04 | 2013-07-22 |

| Predecessor | Solar System | Quadro Fermi-M |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | Quadro Maxwell-M |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 5939 | 6154 |

| Geekbench Vulkan | 4893 | 5484 |

| Geekbench Metal | — | 3823 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 5416 | 5154 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 32 | 30 |

The Radeon R7 M365X has no listed TDP, slot width, power connectors, or display outputs. The Quadro K3100M is specified at 75 W with an MXM Module slot width, no power connectors, and portable device dependent display outputs. The Radeon uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface; the Quadro uses MXM-B (3.0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the Radeon’s Vulkan version is 1.2.170 while the Quadro’s is 1.2.175. Neither card has RT cores or tensor cores, and neither lists FP16 support.