NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 vs NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench Vulkan, and the result is decisive. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 scores 53,927 points, while the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q scores 31,220 points. That is a 42.1% advantage for the RTX 3090 in this specific test, a gap large enough to classify the GRID M60-1Q as the slower part in raw compute workloads that leverage Vulkan.

Looking at the broader database, the GRID M60-1Q's single Geekbench Vulkan score places it at the 76th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 at 31,206 points (a 0% difference), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER at 31,087 points (0.4% ahead of the GRID), and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell at 31,532 points (1% behind the GRID). The GRID M60-1Q essentially sits in a tight cluster of cards that all score within about 1.4% of each other, with the NVIDIA TITAN RTX at 31,676 points being the only nearby card that edges it out by more than a single percentage point.

The RTX 3090, by contrast, has a much richer benchmark history. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 27,565, which places it at the 73rd percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile at 27,435 points (0.5% ahead of the RTX 3090), the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT at 27,425 points (0.5% ahead), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 at 27,839 points (1% behind the RTX 3090), and the AMD Radeon RX 7800M at 27,883 points (1.1% behind). The RTX 3090's average is dragged down by several older DirectX tests, but its Vulkan score is the clear outlier in its favor.

The head-to-head data is unambiguous: the RTX 3090 wins the only shared benchmark, and it wins by a wide margin. The GRID M60-1Q has no wins in any recorded comparison. For the single test where both cards have results, the RTX 3090's 53,927 Vulkan points represent a 42.1% lead over the GRID's 31,220. In practical terms, this means any Vulkan-based workload will see a substantial performance advantage on the RTX 3090.

The Verdict

The data points to one obvious conclusion: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is the faster GPU in every measurable way within this comparison. The 42.1% lead in Vulkan is not a marginal difference; it is a generational leap that reflects the RTX 3090's newer architecture, larger memory subsystem, and higher compute throughput.

Who should pick the RTX 3090? Anyone running Vulkan-based applications, which includes many modern games and compute frameworks. The RTX 3090 also has a much broader benchmark profile, with 10 recorded tests covering DirectX 9 through 12, OpenCL, and compute workloads. Its average score of 27,565, while lower than its Vulkan score due to legacy test results, still places it in the 73rd percentile overall. The RTX 3090 is the choice for workloads that need raw performance, especially in graphics-intensive tasks that use modern APIs.

Who should pick the GRID M60-1Q? The data does not provide a compelling case. The GRID's single Vulkan score of 31,220 is respectable, placing it at the 76th percentile, which is actually higher than the RTX 3090's 73rd percentile ranking. But that percentile is based on a narrower set of data, and the GRID's nearest rivals all score within 1.4% of it. The GRID M60-1Q is a Maxwell-era part from 2015, and its only benchmark result puts it in a performance tier that the RTX 3090 exceeds by over 20,000 points. For any use case where Vulkan performance matters, the RTX 3090 is the superior choice.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations, and the database records several key differences. The GRID M60-1Q uses the GM204 chip with the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The RTX 3090 uses the GA102 chip with the Ampere architecture, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung. This process shrink alone explains a large portion of the performance gap: the RTX 3090 packs 28,300 million transistors into a 628 mm² die, while the GRID M60-1Q has only 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die. The transistor density tells the story: the RTX 3090 has 45.1 million transistors per square millimeter, versus 13.1 million for the GRID.

Memory is another major divergence. The RTX 3090 has 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 936.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The GRID M60-1Q has just 1 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, with 160.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 3090 offers 24 times the capacity and nearly 6 times the bandwidth. For any workload that touches large datasets, this is a decisive difference.

Compute resources also favor the RTX 3090 heavily. The RTX 3090 has 10,496 shading units, 328 texture mapping units, and 112 raster output units. It also includes 82 ray tracing cores and 328 tensor cores. The GRID M60-1Q has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with no ray tracing or tensor cores. The pixel rate is 189.8 GPixel/s for the RTX 3090 versus 75.39 GPixel/s for the GRID. Texture rate is 556.0 GTexel/s versus 150.8 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 35.58 TFLOPS for the RTX 3090, while the GRID manages 4.825 TFLOPS. The RTX 3090 also supports FP16 at 35.58 TFLOPS, while the GRID has no recorded FP16 capability.

Clock speeds differ as well. The RTX 3090 has a base clock of 1395 MHz and a boost of 1695 MHz. The GRID M60-1Q has a base of 557 MHz and a boost of 1178 MHz. Memory clocks are 1219 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective) for the RTX 3090 versus 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for the GRID. The RTX 3090 also supports PCIe 4.0 x16, while the GRID uses PCIe 3.0 x16. API support differs: the RTX 3090 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GRID supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 has 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, while the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q has 1 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus.

Q: What is the performance difference in the shared benchmark?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the RTX 3090 scores 53,927 versus the GRID M60-1Q's 31,220, a 42.1% lead for the RTX 3090.

Q: Which GPU has ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: Only the RTX 3090 has these features: 82 ray tracing cores and 328 tensor cores. The GRID M60-1Q has neither.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The RTX 3090 has a TDP of 350 W and a suggested PSU of 750 W. The GRID M60-1Q has a TDP of 225 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Q: Which GPU is newer?

A: The RTX 3090 was released on August 31, 2020, while the GRID M60-1Q was released on August 29, 2015. Both are now end-of-life.

Q: How do their form factors compare?

A: The RTX 3090 is a triple-slot card measuring 336 mm in length, 140 mm in height, and 61 mm in width. The GRID M60-1Q is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length. The RTX 3090 uses a 1x 12-pin power connector, while the GRID uses a 1x 8-pin connector.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3090 wins in every recorded scenario. The head-to-head benchmark shows a 42.1% advantage in Vulkan, and the architecture differences reinforce this across all categories. For gaming on modern APIs, the RTX 3090's DirectX 12 Ultimate support and ray tracing cores make it the clear choice. For compute workloads, the RTX 3090's 35.58 TFLOPS FP32 and 35.58 TFLOPS FP16 throughput dwarf the GRID's 4.825 TFLOPS FP32. For memory-intensive tasks, the RTX 3090's 936.2 GB/s bandwidth and 24 GB capacity are in a different class entirely.

The GRID M60-1Q has no benchmark wins and no architecture features that overcome the RTX 3090's advantages. Its single Vulkan score of 31,220 puts it in a pack with cards like the Quadro M5000 and RTX 4070 Ti SUPER, but even that pack is far behind the RTX 3090. The GRID's only potential niche would be in scenarios where its lower power draw (225 W vs 350 W) and shorter length (267 mm vs 336 mm) matter, but the database provides no benchmark evidence to support such a choice.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 |

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

| Chip | GM204 | GA102 |

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 5,200 million | 28,300 million |

| Die Size | 398 mm² | 628 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.1M / mm² | 45.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 557 MHz | 1395 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz | 1695 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 1219 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6X |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.4 GB/s | 936.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 10496 |

| TMUs | 128 | 328 |

| ROPs | 64 | 112 |

| RT Cores | None | 82 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 328 |

| Pixel Rate | 75.39 GPixel/s | 189.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 150.8 GTexel/s | 556.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.825 TFLOPS | 35.58 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | None recorded | 35.58 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 225 W | 350 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Triple-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 12-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 750 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 336 mm (13.2 inches) |

| Height | Not recorded | 140 mm (5.5 inches) |

| Width | Not recorded | 61 mm (2.4 inches) |

| Release Date | 2015-08-29 | 2020-08-31 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | 1,499 USD |