NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB vs NVIDIA Quadro K3100M Comparison

# NVIDIA Quadro K3100M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB

The benchmark data presents a stark generational divide: the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M, a 2013-era Kepler mobile workstation part, posts an average benchmark score of 5154, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB, an Ampere desktop flagship from 2022, averages 4791 in its sole recorded test. This is counterintuitive at first glance, but the scoring contexts are entirely different — the K3100M's average is drawn from Geekbench OpenCL, Vulkan, and Metal tests, whereas the RTX 3080 12 GB's single score comes from 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, a far more demanding modern workload. The data does not support a direct apples-to-apples comparison, yet the architectural and specification gaps are so vast that the verdict writes itself: the RTX 3080 12 GB is in a different performance universe, even if the aggregate numbers suggest otherwise.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There are no direct head-to-head benchmark entries in the data, meaning no test was run on both cards under identical conditions. The K3100M's best recorded result is 6154 in Geekbench OpenCL, followed by 5484 in Geekbench Vulkan and 3823 in Geekbench Metal. The RTX 3080 12 GB has only one recorded benchmark: 4791 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. This disparity in test methodology makes raw score comparison misleading. The K3100M's OpenCL score of 6154 is 28.4% higher than the RTX 3080 12 GB's 3DMark score of 4791, but that gap is meaningless across different benchmarks. What the data does reveal is the relative positioning of each card within their own performance tiers. The K3100M sits at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, with its closest rival being the AMD Radeon R7 M260X at 5161 (a 0.1% difference) and the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M at 5211 (1.1% higher). The RTX 3080 12 GB ranks at the 28th percentile, with its nearest competitor being the AMD Radeon R5 M255 at 4788 (0.1% higher) and the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX at 4844 (1.1% higher). In both cases, the cards are clustered tightly with low-end mobile parts — a statistical artifact of the benchmark databases, not a reflection of real-world capability.

Where Each One Wins

The K3100M wins on raw aggregate benchmark score: its 5154 average eclipses the RTX 3080 12 GB's 4791 by 7.6%. It also demonstrates strength across three different compute APIs (OpenCL, Vulkan, Metal), whereas the RTX 3080 12 GB has only been validated in one DX12 test. This suggests the K3100M, despite its age, retains functional utility in legacy compute workloads and cross-platform scenarios. The RTX 3080 12 GB wins on every meaningful hardware specification: it has 8,960 shading units versus 768, 280 texture mapping units versus 64, and 96 ROPs versus 32. Its pixel rate of 164.2 GPixel/s is 14.5 times higher than the K3100M's 11.30 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 478.8 GTexel/s is 10.6 times higher than the K3100M's 45.18 GTexel/s. The RTX 3080 12 GB also delivers 30.64 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, a 28.2-fold advantage over the K3100M's 1,084.4 GFLOPS. In memory, the RTX 3080 12 GB offers 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus with 912.4 GB/s bandwidth, versus the K3100M's 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s — a 8.9x bandwidth advantage. The RTX 3080 12 GB also brings hardware ray tracing (70 RT cores) and tensor cores (280), which the K3100M completely lacks.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are separated by two full architecture generations and a fundamental design philosophy shift. The K3100M uses the GK104 chip on a 28 nm TSMC process, packing 3,540 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.0M per mm². The RTX 3080 12 GB uses the GA102 chip on Samsung's 8 nm process, with 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die — a density of 45.1M per mm². That is an 8-fold increase in transistor count and a 3.75x density improvement. The K3100M's Kepler architecture is from the Quadro Kepler-M generation, with a base and boost clock of 706 MHz and memory running at 3.2 Gbps effective. The RTX 3080 12 GB's Ampere architecture clocks much higher: 1260 MHz base and 1710 MHz boost, with 19 Gbps effective memory. The K3100M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175; the RTX 3080 12 GB supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 — a newer specification revision. Power consumption reflects the performance gap: the K3100M is rated at 75 W TDP on an MXM module with no power connectors, while the RTX 3080 12 GB draws 350 W, requires a dual-slot cooler, a 12-pin power connector, and a 750 W suggested PSU. The RTX 3080 12 GB is a 285 mm long, 112 mm tall, 40 mm wide card with 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs; the K3100M's display outputs are listed as "portable device dependent," reflecting its laptop-oriented MXM form factor.

The Verdict

The data makes one thing unambiguous: the RTX 3080 12 GB is the overwhelmingly superior GPU in every measurable hardware specification. It has 11.7x more shading units, 4.4x more TMUs, 3x more ROPs, 28.2x more FP32 compute, and 8.9x more memory bandwidth. It supports modern rendering features like hardware ray tracing and tensor core acceleration that the K3100M cannot even approximate. The K3100M's only "win" — its higher aggregate benchmark score — is an artifact of different test suites and cannot be interpreted as real-world superiority. For any modern gaming, rendering, or compute workload, the RTX 3080 12 GB is the only viable choice from this data. The K3100M remains relevant only for legacy applications that require Kepler-era compatibility or for systems constrained to MXM form factors and 75 W power envelopes. The RTX 3080 12 GB's 28th percentile ranking among all GPUs is similarly misleading; it reflects a single demanding DX12 test, not its true standing. In practical terms, the RTX 3080 12 GB's launch MSRP is 799 USD, and given its hardware specifications, that positions it as a high-end part, while the K3100M has no recorded launch MSRP. The verdict: choose the RTX 3080 12 GB for any task requiring modern performance; choose the K3100M only if you are bound by legacy MXM socket constraints or a strict 75 W power limit.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M has an average benchmark score of 5154, which is 7.6% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB's average of 4791.

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference between the two cards?

A: The RTX 3080 12 GB delivers 30.64 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 28.2x higher than the K3100M's 1,084.4 GFLOPS.

Q: Does the K3100M support hardware ray tracing?

A: No, the K3100M has no RT cores, while the RTX 3080 12 GB includes 70 RT cores and 280 tensor cores.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The RTX 3080 12 GB has 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus with 912.4 GB/s bandwidth, versus the K3100M's 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The K3100M is rated at 75 W TDP, while the RTX 3080 12 GB is rated at 350 W TDP and requires a 750 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Only the RTX 3080 12 GB supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2); the K3100M supports DirectX 12 (11_0).

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro K3100M | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB |

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

| Chip | GK104 | GA102 |

| Architecture | Kepler | Ampere |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 3,540 million | 28,300 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 628 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.0M / mm² | 45.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 706 MHz | 1260 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 706 MHz | 1710 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 3.2 Gbps effective | 19 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6X |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 912.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 8960 |

| TMUs | 64 | 280 |

| ROPs | 32 | 96 |

| RT Cores | — | 70 |

| Tensor Cores | — | 280 |

| Pixel Rate | 11.30 GPixel/s | 164.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 45.18 GTexel/s | 478.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,084.4 GFLOPS | 30.64 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | — | 30.64 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 350 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 12-pin |

| Suggested PSU | — | 750 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2013-07-22 | 2022-01-10 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |