NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti vs NVIDIA Quadro 3000M Comparison

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti vs NVIDIA Quadro 3000M

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti and the NVIDIA Quadro 3000M occupy different eras and purposes in the database, separated by roughly five years of GPU architecture evolution. The GTX 1050 Ti is a desktop consumer card from the Pascal generation, while the Quadro 3000M is a mobile professional part built on Fermi. The benchmark data reveals a decisive performance gap, with the GTX 1050 Ti delivering 387.6% higher OpenCL scores than the Quadro 3000M. The GTX 1050 Ti sits in the 25th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro 3000M ranks at the 22nd percentile, but the actual recorded scores tell a story of generational dominance rather than close competition.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce GTX 1050 Ti wins in every measurable category where both cards have recorded data. The head-to-head benchmark comparison shows a single test, Geekbench OpenCL, where the GTX 1050 Ti scores 18129 against the Quadro 3000M's 3718, a 387.6% advantage. This is not a marginal victory; it represents a complete generational leap in compute throughput. The GTX 1050 Ti's average benchmark score across all tests is 4193, compared to the Quadro 3000M's 3718 average from its single recorded benchmark. The consumer card also has a much broader benchmark footprint, with results across 3DMark Steel Nomad, multiple Geekbench compute APIs, and PassMark suites covering DirectX 9 through 12, 2D, 3D, and GPU compute workloads.

The Quadro 3000M, by contrast, has no recorded wins in the database. Its only benchmark result is the Geekbench OpenCL score, and even there it trails the GTX 1050 Ti by a wide margin. The Quadro 3000M's nearest rivals in the database are the GeForce GT 740M, GeForce GT 635M, GeForce 825M, and Radeon HD 6770, all of which are within 1.9% of its average score. This places the Quadro 3000M firmly in the lower-middle segment of mobile GPUs from its era, whereas the GTX 1050 Ti's nearest rivals include the Radeon R5 M330, Quadro K2100M, Quadro K3000M, and Radeon Vega 3, spanning a delta of just 1.8% in either direction. The GTX 1050 Ti effectively anchors a performance tier that the older Quadro cannot reach.

For users, the GTX 1050 Ti is the clear choice for any compute or graphics task that leverages OpenCL, including general-purpose GPU workloads and modern game rendering. The Quadro 3000M may still be functional for legacy professional applications, but the data indicates it cannot compete with the GTX 1050 Ti in raw throughput, and its older Fermi architecture lacks support for modern APIs like Vulkan. The GTX 1050 Ti also supports DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro 3000M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) with no Vulkan support recorded.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti than the Quadro 3000M in OpenCL?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 1050 Ti scores 18129 compared to the Quadro 3000M's 3718, a delta of 387.6% in favor of the GTX 1050 Ti.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between these two GPUs?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti has an average benchmark score of 4193 across all its recorded tests, while the Quadro 3000M averages 3718 from its single recorded benchmark, a difference of 475 points.

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti supports DirectX 12_1, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro 3000M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support recorded in the database.

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

A: The GTX 1050 Ti's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R5 M330 with a delta of 0.6%, and it trails the AMD Radeon Vega 3 by 1.8%. The Quadro 3000M's nearest rival is the GeForce GT 740M with a 0% delta, and it leads the Radeon HD 6770 by 1.9%.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each card?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 112.1 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro 3000M has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 80.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti packs 3,300 million transistors into a 132 mm² die for a density of 25.0M per mm². The Quadro 3000M has 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, yielding 5.9M per mm².

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is a landslide. The GTX 1050 Ti produces a score of 18129, while the Quadro 3000M manages 3718. The delta of 387.6% means the GTX 1050 Ti delivers nearly five times the OpenCL compute performance of the Quadro 3000M. This test exercises the GPU's general compute capabilities, including the FP32 pipeline, memory subsystem, and driver overhead. The GTX 1050 Ti's FP32 throughput is listed at 2.138 TFLOPS, while the Quadro 3000M manages only 432.0 GFLOPS, a difference that scales directly into the observed OpenCL result.

Beyond the single shared test, the GTX 1050 Ti's broader benchmark suite illustrates its versatility. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 305. In Geekbench Metal, it reaches 7834, and in Geekbench Vulkan it scores 10001. PassMark results show 6340 in G3D, 651 in G2D, and 2652 in GPU compute. DirectX-specific PassMark tests range from 26 in DirectX 12 to 104 in DirectX 9, with DirectX 11 at 45 and DirectX 10 at 31. The Quadro 3000M has no recorded results for any of these tests, so the database cannot confirm its performance in those workloads, but its OpenCL deficit strongly suggests it would trail in most compute and graphics scenarios.

The wins table confirms the asymmetry: the GTX 1050 Ti holds 1 win in the head-to-head category, while the Quadro 3000M has 0. This is not a balanced rivalry; it is a one-sided comparison where the newer architecture simply outclasses the older one across every metric that has been measured. The percentile rankings reinforce this, with the GTX 1050 Ti at the 25th percentile of all GPUs and the Quadro 3000M at the 22nd, though the raw score gap is far larger than that 3-percentile-point difference might suggest.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every core specification. The GTX 1050 Ti uses a 14 nm process from Samsung, while the Quadro 3000M uses a 40 nm process from TSMC. The GTX 1050 Ti has 3,300 million transistors on a 132 mm² die, giving a density of 25.0M per mm². The Quadro 3000M has 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, with a density of just 5.9M per mm². The GTX 1050 Ti has a base clock of 1291 MHz and a boost clock of 1392 MHz, while the Quadro 3000M has no base or boost clock listed in the database. Memory clocks also differ: the GTX 1050 Ti runs at 1752 MHz with 7 Gbps effective speed, while the Quadro 3000M runs at 625 MHz with 2.5 Gbps effective.

Memory capacity favors the GTX 1050 Ti at 4 GB versus 2 GB, though the Quadro 3000M has a wider 256-bit bus compared to the GTX 1050 Ti's 128-bit bus. Despite the wider bus, the GTX 1050 Ti achieves higher bandwidth at 112.1 GB/s versus 80.00 GB/s. The GTX 1050 Ti has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Quadro 3000M has 240 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Pixel rate is 44.54 GPixel/s for the GTX 1050 Ti versus 4.500 GPixel/s for the Quadro 3000M. Texture rate is 66.82 GTexel/s versus 18.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 2.138 TFLOPS versus 432.0 GFLOPS. The GTX 1050 Ti also lists FP16 at 33.41 GFLOPS, while the Quadro 3000M has no FP16 data.

The form factors are entirely different. The GTX 1050 Ti is a dual-slot card measuring 145 mm in length and 111 mm in height, using a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface with no power connectors. The Quadro 3000M is an MXM module using an MXM-B (3.0) interface, with display outputs described as portable device dependent. The GTX 1050 Ti has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The GTX 1050 Ti has a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the Quadro 3000M has none listed. Both cards share a 75 W TDP.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 1050 Ti is built on the Pascal architecture with the GP107 chip, while the Quadro 3000M uses the Fermi architecture with the GF104 chip. Pascal is a generation that introduced significant efficiency and compute improvements over Fermi, which launched in 2010. The GTX 1050 Ti belongs to the GeForce 10-series, released in 2016, while the Quadro 3000M is part of the Quadro Fermi-M generation, released in 2011. The GTX 1050 Ti's predecessor is the GeForce 900 series and its successor is the GeForce 20 series. The Quadro 3000M's predecessor is the Quadro FX Mobile and its successor is the Quadro Kepler-M.

The process node difference is stark: 14 nm for Pascal versus 40 nm for Fermi. This allows the GTX 1050 Ti to pack nearly 70% more transistors into a die that is less than half the size, resulting in a transistor density that is over four times higher. The GTX 1050 Ti's memory subsystem is also more efficient, delivering higher bandwidth despite a narrower bus, thanks to faster GDDR5 clocks. The GTX 1050 Ti supports modern APIs including DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the Quadro 3000M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and has no Vulkan support. The GTX 1050 Ti's FP32 compute is nearly five times that of the Quadro 3000M, and it adds FP16 capability that the Fermi part lacks entirely.

The architectural differences manifest directly in benchmark results. The GTX 1050 Ti's 2.138 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 112.1 GB/s bandwidth feed its 18129 OpenCL score, while the Quadro 3000M's 432.0 GFLOPS and 80.00 GB/s bandwidth produce only 3718. The Pascal architecture's improvements in instruction scheduling, memory compression, and power efficiency are not directly quantified in the database, but the recorded performance gap is consistent with a generational leap. The GTX 1050 Ti also benefits from a higher pixel rate of 44.54 GPixel/s versus 4.500 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 66.82 GTexel/s versus 18.00 GTexel/s, both of which contribute to its superior graphics rendering capabilities. The Quadro 3000M's only advantage lies in its wider 256-bit memory bus, but slower clock speeds negate that benefit, resulting in lower overall bandwidth.