AMD Radeon Vega 3 vs NVIDIA Quadro K3000M Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the AMD Radeon Vega 3 and NVIDIA Quadro K3000M compare in average benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 3 has an average benchmark score of 4268, while the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M scores 4241. The Vega 3 leads by 0.6% according to the deltaPct in its nearestRivals listing, a margin that is effectively negligible in real-world terms.

Q: Which GPU wins the only head-to-head benchmark available?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M scores 4241 against the AMD Radeon Vega 3’s 3963, giving the Quadro a 6.6% victory. The head-to-head data records exactly one win for the Quadro and zero for the Vega 3.

Q: What is the transistor and die-size relationship between the two chips?

A: The AMD Picasso chip packs 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die using a 12 nm process, yielding a density of 23.5M transistors per mm². The NVIDIA GK104 has 3,540 million transistors on a larger 294 mm² die built on 28 nm, giving a density of only 12.0M per mm².

Q: How do their memory subsystems differ?

A: The Quadro K3000M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 89.60 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 3 relies entirely on system-shared memory, with its bus width and type listed as “System Shared” and bandwidth marked as “System Dependent.”

Q: Which GPU supports the newer graphics APIs?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 3 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA Quadro K3000M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175, meaning the Vega 3 has a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 3 has a TDP of 15 W and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors. The NVIDIA Quadro K3000M has a 75 W TDP, comes as an MXM module, and also has no power connectors listed.

Where Each One Wins

The data splits cleanly between the two GPUs, though the margin is thin. The AMD Radeon Vega 3 wins on average aggregate performance, posting 4268 versus the Quadro’s 4241 — a 0.6% advantage. That edge is driven by the Vega 3’s stronger showing in Geekbench Metal (4880) and Geekbench Vulkan (3961), two tests the Quadro does not even appear in. For users running compute workloads through those APIs, the Vega 3 is the clear choice.

The NVIDIA Quadro K3000M wins the only directly comparable benchmark. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 4241 against the Vega 3’s 3963, a 6.6% lead. This is the single head-to-head datapoint, and it favors the Quadro decisively. The Quadro also brings dedicated GDDR5 memory with 89.60 GB/s bandwidth, which matters for applications that are sensitive to memory latency and sustained throughput rather than raw shader count.

Neither GPU holds a commanding position in the broader market. Both sit at the 25th percentile among all GPUs, meaning they are statistically indistinguishable in overall standing. The Vega 3’s nearest rivals include the GeForce GTX 460M (0.3% slower) and the FirePro W2100 (0.6% slower), while the Quadro’s nearest rivals include the GTX 460M (1.0% faster) and the GTX 1050 Ti (1.2% slower). These deltaPct values are all within a couple of percentage points, so the practical performance envelope is nearly identical.

For mobile or embedded environments where power draw is a constraint, the Vega 3’s 15 W TDP versus the Quadro’s 75 W is a substantial differentiator. The Quadro’s advantage in OpenCL may be offset by its four-fold higher power consumption in thermally limited chassis. Conversely, the Quadro’s dedicated 2 GB frame buffer and 256-bit bus make it more suitable for legacy workstation applications that expect discrete memory.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon Vega 3 is built on GCN 5.0 architecture using the Picasso chip, manufactured by GlobalFoundries on a 12 nm process. It integrates 192 shading units, 12 texture mapping units, and 4 raster output units. The chip contains 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die, achieving a density of 23.5M transistors per mm². This is an IGP design with no separate memory bus — everything routes through the system’s shared memory.

The NVIDIA Quadro K3000M uses the Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It packs 576 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs — significantly more of each than the Vega 3. The GK104 die is larger at 294 mm² but holds fewer transistors (3,540 million), resulting in a lower density of 12.0M per mm². The Quadro is a discrete MXM module with its own 2 GB GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus.

The Vega 3’s 12 nm node gives it a clear manufacturing advantage in terms of density and power efficiency. Its 15 W TDP is one-fifth of the Quadro’s 75 W. The Vega 3 supports DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.3, whereas the Quadro is limited to DirectX 11_0 and Vulkan 1.2.175. The Quadro compensates with nearly three times the shading units (576 vs 192) and eight times the ROPs (32 vs 4), which directly boosts its pixel and texture throughput.

The Vega 3 offers FP16 at 844.8 GFLOPS (2:1 ratio) while the Quadro lists no FP16 capability. In FP32, the Quadro leads with 753.4 GFLOPS versus the Vega 3’s 422.4 GFLOPS. The Quadro’s pixel rate is 7.848 GPixel/s and texture rate is 31.39 GTexel/s; the Vega 3 trails at 4.400 GPixel/s and 13.20 GTexel/s respectively.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification. The Vega 3 uses a 12 nm process from GlobalFoundries; the Quadro uses 28 nm from TSMC. Transistor counts are 4,940 million versus 3,540 million, with die sizes of 210 mm² and 294 mm² respectively. The Vega 3’s base clock is 300 MHz with a boost to 1100 MHz; the Quadro runs at a flat 654 MHz for both base and boost. Memory clocks are “System Shared” for the Vega 3 versus 700 MHz (2.8 Gbps effective) for the Quadro.

Memory configuration is a major split: the Vega 3 has system-shared memory with no dedicated size, type, or bus width, while the Quadro has 2 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit interface with 89.60 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units are 192 for AMD versus 576 for NVIDIA. TMUs are 12 versus 48, and ROPs are 4 versus 32. Pixel rate is 4.400 GPixel/s versus 7.848 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 13.20 GTexel/s versus 31.39 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 422.4 GFLOPS versus 753.4 GFLOPS.

Power and form factor differ sharply: the Vega 3 is an IGP at 15 W, while the Quadro is an MXM module at 75 W. The bus interface is IGP for AMD and MXM-B (3.0) for NVIDIA. Display outputs are motherboard-dependent for the Vega 3 and portable-device-dependent for the Quadro. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but DirectX versions differ (12_1 vs 11_0) and Vulkan versions differ (1.3 vs 1.2.175). The Vega 3 was released in 2019, the Quadro in 2012. Both are end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole head-to-head comparison is Geekbench OpenCL, where the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M beats the AMD Radeon Vega 3 by 6.6%. The Quadro scores 4241 against the Vega 3’s 3963. This is the Quadro’s only benchmark entry, so its entire average score is derived from this single result.

The Vega 3, by contrast, has three benchmark entries. Its Geekbench Metal score of 4880 is its strongest result, followed by Geekbench OpenCL at 3963 and Geekbench Vulkan at 3961. The Metal score is 18.6% higher than the OpenCL score, suggesting the Vega 3’s architecture is better suited to Apple’s compute framework. The OpenCL and Vulkan scores are nearly identical, differing by only 0.05%.

When interpreting the head-to-head, the 6.6% OpenCL deficit for the Vega 3 is notable but not catastrophic. The Quadro’s advantage likely stems from its dedicated GDDR5 memory and higher shader count — 576 versus 192 — which directly benefits memory-bound OpenCL workloads. However, the Vega 3’s average score across all tests (4268) exceeds the Quadro’s average (4241) because the Vega 3’s Metal and Vulkan results compensate for its OpenCL shortfall.

The deltaPct between the two in the nearestRivals listings is symmetric: the Vega 3 sees the Quadro as 0.6% faster, while the Quadro sees the Vega 3 as 0.6% slower. This discrepancy arises because the Vega 3’s average includes three tests while the Quadro’s includes only one. For a balanced assessment, the OpenCL head-to-head is the most direct comparison, and it favors the Quadro. For a multi-API perspective, the Vega 3’s broader feature set and lower power draw make it the more versatile part in modern environments.