NVIDIA GeForce 830M vs NVIDIA Quadro M3000M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M and the NVIDIA GeForce 830M. Only two common benchmark tests exist in the database, and the Quadro M3000M wins both by massive margins.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro M3000M scores 16646, while the GeForce 830M manages 4324. This translates to a 285% advantage for the Quadro card. The gap widens further in Geekbench Vulkan, where the Quadro M3000M posts 16668 against the GeForce 830M's 3590, a delta of 364.3%. These are not marginal differences; they represent entirely different performance tiers.

The overall average benchmark score reinforces this split. The Quadro M3000M holds an average of 4621 across all recorded tests, placing it at the 27th percentile among all GPUs. The GeForce 830M averages 3957, sitting at the 24th percentile. While the percentiles are close, the average scores differ by roughly 17%, and the head-to-head comparisons show the real magnitude of the gap.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card provides context. The Quadro M3000M's closest competitor in average score is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M at 4628, a mere 0.1% difference. It also trades blows with the AMD Radeon R5 M320 and AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, both at 4657, and sits 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R5 M230 at 4577. For the GeForce 830M, the nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R5 M420 at 3956, essentially a tie, followed by the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M at 3953, the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 at 3964, and the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 at 3977.

The database records two wins for the Quadro M3000M and zero for the GeForce 830M in direct comparisons. Every available metric points in the same direction.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M3000M wins with a score of 16646, which is 285% higher than the GeForce 830M's 4324.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap between the two cards?

A: The Quadro M3000M scores 16668 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the GeForce 830M scores 3590. The Quadro card leads by 364.3%.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The Quadro M3000M has an average benchmark score of 4621, while the GeForce 830M averages 3957.

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

A: The Quadro M3000M sits at the 27th percentile, and the GeForce 830M sits at the 24th percentile.

Q: Who are the closest rivals to each card in average score?

A: For the Quadro M3000M, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M is the nearest rival at 4628, a 0.1% difference. For the GeForce 830M, the AMD Radeon R5 M420 is nearest at 3956, with no measurable difference.

Q: Which GPU has more wins in head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The Quadro M3000M has 2 wins, and the GeForce 830M has 0 wins in the recorded head-to-head tests.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA Quadro M3000M is the superior performer in every recorded benchmark. Its 285% lead in OpenCL and 364.3% lead in Vulkan demonstrate that it operates in a completely different class from the GeForce 830M. Anyone requiring serious compute throughput for professional workloads should choose the Quadro M3000M based on these numbers alone.

The GeForce 830M, while a functional mobile GPU, cannot compete with the Quadro M3000M's computational output. Its average score of 3957 places it near the bottom of the database's rankings, and its nearest rivals are all similarly low-scoring parts. The Quadro M3000M, by contrast, trades almost evenly with the much newer AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, a card from a different era entirely.

That said, the GeForce 830M has one clear advantage in the data: power consumption. At 33 W, it draws less than half the power of the Quadro M3000M's 75 W. For systems where thermal and power budgets are extremely tight, and where the compute workloads are light, the GeForce 830M could be the more practical choice. But for raw performance, the verdict is clear.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The Quadro M3000M uses the GM204 chip, while the GeForce 830M uses the GM108. Both are built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the chip sizes diverge sharply: the Quadro M3000M's die measures 398 mm², versus 77 mm² for the GeForce 830M. Transistor counts follow suit, with 5,200 million in the Quadro M3000M against 1,020 million in the GeForce 830M. Transistor density is nearly identical at 13.1M per mm² for the Quadro and 13.2M per mm² for the GeForce.

Memory configurations differ fundamentally. The Quadro M3000M ships with 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The GeForce 830M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, yielding just 14.40 GB/s. That is an 11x difference in memory bandwidth, which heavily impacts workloads that saturate memory.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The GeForce 830M runs at a base clock of 1082 MHz and boosts to 1150 MHz, while the Quadro M3000M runs at 823 MHz base and 924 MHz boost. The GeForce also has a higher memory clock at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) versus the Quadro's 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The Quadro compensates with far more compute units: 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, against the GeForce's 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs.

Rates and throughput figures reflect these differences. The Quadro M3000M achieves 29.57 GPixel/s pixel rate and 59.14 GTexel/s texture rate, while the GeForce 830M manages 9.200 GPixel/s and 18.40 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 1.892 TFLOPS for the Quadro versus 588.8 GFLOPS for the GeForce, a 3.2x gap.

Power and interface also differ. The Quadro M3000M has a 75 W TDP and uses an MXM Module slot, while the GeForce 830M has a 33 W TDP and is classified as an IGP. The Quadro runs on PCIe 3.0 x16, the GeForce on PCIe 3.0 x8. DirectX support differs: the Quadro supports 12 (12_1), while the GeForce supports 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. Neither card has power connectors, and both have portable-device-dependent display outputs.

Release dates also diverge: the GeForce 830M launched on 2014-03-11, while the Quadro M3000M came on 2015-08-17. Both are end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

The Quadro M3000M is built on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, while the GeForce 830M uses the original Maxwell architecture. This is a generational distinction within the same family, and it explains some of the capability differences.

The Maxwell 2.0 architecture in the Quadro M3000M supports DirectX 12_1, which includes features like conservative rasterization and raster order views. The original Maxwell in the GeForce 830M only reaches DirectX 12_0 level (listed as 11_0 in the API field), meaning it lacks some of the more advanced rendering features available to the Quadro card. Both GPUs support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, so software compatibility is not a differentiator there.

The chip designs themselves are fundamentally different in scale. The GM204 in the Quadro M3000M is a large, high-end die with 5,200 million transistors spread across 398 mm². The GM108 in the GeForce 830M is a small, low-power die with 1,020 million transistors on 77 mm². This size difference directly translates to the 4x gap in shading units (1024 versus 256) and TMUs (64 versus 16), plus a 4x gap in ROPs (32 versus 8).

The memory architecture also reflects different design goals. The Quadro M3000M uses a 256-bit GDDR5 interface with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth, designed for professional workloads that move large amounts of data. The GeForce 830M uses a 64-bit DDR3 interface with 14.40 GB/s, sufficient for basic display tasks and light gaming but not for serious compute.

The power envelopes reveal the design philosophy difference. The Quadro M3000M draws 75 W, which is high for a mobile part but necessary to feed its large compute array. The GeForce 830M draws only 33 W, making it suitable for thin and light notebooks where battery life takes priority over performance. The Quadro's MXM Module form factor indicates it is designed for professional mobile workstations, while the GeForce's IGP classification points to integrated or low-end discrete use in consumer laptops.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro M3000M wins in every measured performance category. Its 285% OpenCL advantage and 364.3% Vulkan advantage make it the clear choice for any workload that stresses the GPU. Professional 3D rendering, scientific compute, video encoding, and CAD applications all fall into this category, and the data supports the Quadro card for these tasks. Its 4 GB GDDR5 memory with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth provides the headroom needed for large datasets and high-resolution textures.

The Quadro M3000M also wins on API feature support. Its DirectX 12_1 support enables modern rendering techniques that the GeForce 830M cannot handle at the same level, given its DirectX 12 (11_0) limitation. For users running the latest games or professional applications that use these features, the Quadro card is the only viable option between these two.

The NVIDIA GeForce 830M wins on power efficiency and thermal footprint. At 33 W, it consumes less than half the power of the Quadro M3000M's 75 W. In a thin laptop with limited cooling, the GeForce 830M can run without throttling or excessive fan noise, while the Quadro M3000M would require a larger chassis and more robust thermal solution. For basic productivity tasks, video playback, and light gaming, the GeForce 830M provides adequate performance at a fraction of the power cost.

The GeForce 830M also has a higher base clock (1082 MHz versus 823 MHz) and boost clock (1150 MHz versus 924 MHz), which helps in lightly threaded or latency-sensitive tasks where raw clock speed matters more than parallel throughput. That said, these clock advantages do not appear in the recorded benchmarks, where the Quadro M3000M dominates.

Users should choose based on their priorities. If performance and professional capability matter most, the Quadro M3000M is the clear pick. If power draw is the primary constraint and workloads are light, the GeForce 830M offers a lower-power alternative. The benchmark data contains no scenario where the GeForce 830M outperforms the Quadro M3000M in compute throughput.