NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M vs NVIDIA Quadro K3100M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a split decision between these two mobile Kepler GPUs, with each claiming one benchmark victory. In Geekbench Metal, the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M takes the lead with a score of 3823 against the GeForce GTX 770M's 3448, a delta of -9.8% from the perspective of the GeForce card. That translates to the Quadro being roughly 10% faster in this particular API test, a notable margin for a workstation-oriented part.

The GeForce GTX 770M answers back decisively in Geekbench OpenCL. Here the GTX 770M posts 8552, while the Quadro K3100M manages only 6154. The delta of 39% is substantial, indicating the GeForce part holds a commanding lead in compute workloads that leverage OpenCL. This is the single largest performance gap in either direction between the two cards, and it dwarfs the Metal advantage the Quadro enjoys.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the average benchmark scores place these cards in different tiers. The GeForce GTX 770M averages 6000 across its recorded tests, while the Quadro K3100M averages 5154. The percentile rankings reinforce this: the GTX 770M sits at the 35th percentile among all GPUs in the database, whereas the Quadro K3100M lands at the 30th percentile. So while the Quadro wins one head-to-head test, the GeForce's overall average suggests it is the more consistently powerful part in general-purpose compute.

The nearest rivals for each card provide additional calibration. The GTX 770M's average score of 6000 places it essentially level with the AMD Radeon RX 6400 at 6001 (0% delta) and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server at 5996 (0.1% delta), with the AMD FirePro W4100 at 5987 (0.2% delta) and NVIDIA Quadro K4000M at 5986 (0.2% delta) trailing by fractions of a percent. This is a tightly packed cluster, suggesting the GTX 770M performs within a narrow band of these contemporaries.

The Quadro K3100M's nearest rivals tell a similar story of tight competition. Its 5154 average sits just below the AMD Radeon R7 M260X at 5161 (-0.1% delta) and the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M at 5211 (-1.1% delta), while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M at 5236 is -1.6% relative to the K3100M, and the AMD Radeon R7 240 at 5063 represents a +1.8% delta from the K3100M's perspective. These small percentage differences indicate that the Quadro K3100M is competitive within its immediate peer group, though it trails the GTX 770M's average by a wider margin than any of these internal rival deltas.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on NVIDIA's Kepler architecture and fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process node, but the underlying chips differ in scale and configuration. The GeForce GTX 770M uses the GK106 chip, which packs 2,540 million transistors onto a 221 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 11.5 million per square millimeter. The Quadro K3100M steps up to the larger GK104 chip, with 3,540 million transistors across a 294 mm² die, for a density of 12.0 million per square millimeter. This means the Quadro's chip is physically larger and more transistor-dense, yet the benchmark results do not translate that hardware advantage into superior performance across the board.

The core configurations diverge significantly. The GTX 770M fields 960 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units. The Quadro K3100M, despite its larger chip, carries fewer shading units at 768, fewer TMUs at 64, but more ROPs at 32. This is a curious split: the GeForce emphasizes shader and texture throughput, while the Quadro allocates more resources to pixel processing. The pixel rate reflects this, with the GTX 770M hitting 15.94 GPixel/s against the Quadro's 11.30 GPixel/s, a difference that favors the GeForce despite the Quadro's additional ROPs. The texture rate tells a similar story: 63.76 GTexel/s for the GTX 770M versus 45.18 GTexel/s for the Quadro.

Clock behavior also separates the two. The GTX 770M runs at a base clock of 706 MHz with a boost clock of 797 MHz, allowing it to dynamically raise frequency under load. The Quadro K3100M operates at a fixed 706 MHz base and boost clock, with no boost headroom. This locked clock profile likely contributes to the GTX 770M's compute advantage in OpenCL, as the GeForce can push higher frequencies when the workload demands it. Memory clocks follow a similar pattern: the GTX 770M uses 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective), while the Quadro runs at 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective).

Memory configuration adds another layer of differentiation. The GTX 770M comes with 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 96.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro K3100M offers 4 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 256-bit bus, achieving 102.4 GB/s. The Quadro's wider bus and larger capacity give it a bandwidth advantage and more headroom for memory-intensive workloads, even though its lower memory clock partially offsets the bus width benefit.

Both cards share identical API support: DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. They also share the same 75 W TDP, MXM Module slot width, lack of power connectors, MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, and portable-device-dependent display outputs. Neither card includes ray tracing or tensor cores, consistent with their Kepler-generation heritage. The GTX 770M belongs to the GeForce 700M generation, released on 2013-05-29, while the Quadro K3100M is part of the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M) generation, released on 2013-07-22, both now end-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The data points to a clear specialization split. The GeForce GTX 770M wins in raw compute throughput, as evidenced by its 39% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. This makes it the stronger choice for applications that offload heavy parallel math to the GPU, such as rendering, simulation, or general-purpose compute tasks that can leverage OpenCL. The GTX 770M's higher shading unit count, faster boost clock, and superior texture and pixel rates all support this compute-oriented strength.

The Quadro K3100M wins in the Metal benchmark, posting 3823 against the GTX 770M's 3448. Metal is Apple's graphics API, so this suggests the Quadro holds an advantage in Metal-based workloads, which could include macOS rendering or compute tasks that specifically use that API. The Quadro's larger memory capacity (4 GB versus 3 GB) and wider 256-bit bus also give it more headroom for large datasets, even if its overall compute throughput is lower.

For use cases, the split is fairly binary. If the workload is OpenCL-centric, the GTX 770M is the obvious pick, with its 39% delta representing a massive performance gap. If the workload is Metal-centric, the Quadro K3100M leads by 9.8%, a more modest but still meaningful margin. The Quadro's additional 1 GB of VRAM could be a deciding factor for tasks that approach the 3 GB limit of the GTX 770M, though the database does not quantify how memory capacity affects these specific benchmarks.

The average benchmark scores tilt the overall balance toward the GTX 770M, whose 6000 average exceeds the Quadro's 5154 by roughly 16%. But this aggregate hides the fact that the Quadro wins in one of the two shared tests. Neither card dominates outright, and the choice hinges on which API and which workload profile matters more to the user.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M has an average benchmark score of 6000, while the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M averages 5154. The GTX 770M also ranks at the 35th percentile among all GPUs, versus the Quadro's 30th percentile.

Q: What is the biggest performance difference between the two cards?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the GeForce GTX 770M scores 8552 against the Quadro K3100M's 6154, a 39% delta in favor of the GTX 770M. This is the largest gap recorded in any head-to-head test between them.

Q: Does the Quadro K3100M win any benchmark against the GTX 770M?

A: Yes, the Quadro K3100M wins in Geekbench Metal with a score of 3823 versus the GTX 770M's 3448, a 9.8% advantage for the Quadro.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The GTX 770M has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 96.19 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro K3100M has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro also uses a lower memory clock of 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective) compared to the GTX 770M's 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective).

Q: Are both cards built on the same architecture and process node?

A: Yes, both use the Kepler architecture and a 28 nm TSMC process. The GTX 770M uses the GK106 chip with 2,540 million transistors, while the Quadro K3100M uses the larger GK104 chip with 3,540 million transistors.

Q: What is the TDP of each card?

A: Both cards have a TDP of 75 W and use the MXM Module slot width with no power connectors.

The Verdict

The benchmark data does not crown a single winner. The GeForce GTX 770M is the compute powerhouse, with a 39% OpenCL lead and a higher average score of 6000 versus 5154. Its higher shading unit count (960 versus 768), boost clock capability (797 MHz versus fixed 706 MHz), and superior pixel and texture rates make it the better choice for OpenCL-heavy workloads, rendering, or any task that pushes raw shader throughput.

The Quadro K3100M, however, holds a 9.8% advantage in Metal and offers a larger 4 GB memory pool on a 256-bit bus, which could be decisive for memory-bound tasks or Metal-based environments. Its lower average score and smaller shading unit count suggest it is not the stronger general-purpose compute card, but its win in Metal indicates it has specific strengths that the GTX 770M cannot match.

Users should pick the GTX 770M if their primary workloads rely on OpenCL or demand maximum compute throughput, as the 39% delta is a decisive margin. The Quadro K3100M is the better pick for Metal-centric applications or scenarios where the extra 1 GB of VRAM and wider memory bus matter more than raw compute speed. The data does not support a blanket recommendation, only a workload-specific one.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M | NVIDIA Quadro K3100M |

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

| Chip | GK106 | GK104 |

| Generation | GeForce 700M | Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M) |

| Transistors | 2,540 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 221 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 11.5M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Boost Clock | 797 MHz | 706 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective) | 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 3 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 96.19 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 960 | 768 |

| TMUs | 80 | 64 |

| ROPs | 24 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 15.94 GPixel/s | 11.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 63.76 GTexel/s | 45.18 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1.530 TFLOPS | 1,084.4 GFLOPS |

| Release Date | 2013-05-29 | 2013-07-22 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 600M | Quadro Fermi-M |

| Successor | GeForce 800M | Quadro Maxwell-M |

| Average Benchmark Score | 6000 | 5154 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 35 | 30 |

The two cards share identical values for manufacturer (NVIDIA), architecture (Kepler), process node (28 nm), foundry (TSMC), base clock (706 MHz), memory type (GDDR5), TDP (75 W), slot width (MXM Module), power connectors (None), bus interface (MXM-B 3.0), display outputs (Portable Device Dependent), and API support (DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.175). Both are end-of-life products with no launch MSRP recorded in the database.