NVIDIA Quadro M3000M

NVIDIA’s Quadro M3000M is a mobile workstation graphics solution built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, featuring the GM204 chip fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The GPU integrates 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, with a transistor density of 13.1M per mm². The card operates at a base clock of 823 MHz and a boost clock of 924 MHz, paired with 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation pipelines. It delivers a pixel rate of 29.57 GPixel/s, a texture rate of 59.14 GTexel/s, and peak FP32 performance of 1.892 TFLOPS. The board is configured as an MXM Module with a 75 W TDP and no power connectors, relying on the host system for power delivery. Its production status is end-of-life, released on August 17, 2015, positioned between the Quadro Kepler-M predecessor and the Quadro Pascal-M successor. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16, and display outputs are portable device dependent.

Benchmark Performance

The Quadro M3000M’s aggregate benchmark results place it in the 25th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 4,635. This positioning indicates a mobile part that sits firmly in the entry-to-mid range of the performance spectrum, not intended for high-end compute or gaming workloads but rather for professional CAD and visualization tasks where reliability and driver certification matter more than raw speed. The data shows a wide variance across different API tests, which reveals the card’s architectural strengths and weaknesses.

In compute-oriented workloads, the GPU posts a Geekbench OpenCL score of 16,646 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 16,792. These figures are relatively close, suggesting consistent throughput across these two modern APIs. However, the Passmark suite tells a more nuanced story. The DirectX 9 score is 98, which is far higher than any other DirectX test, indicating that the Maxwell 2.0 architecture retains strong legacy performance. The DirectX 11 score drops to 42, and DirectX 10 falls to 26, while DirectX 12 is the lowest at 23. This pattern suggests that the M3000M’s driver and hardware are optimized for older shading models, and its performance degrades significantly as API complexity increases. The compute-oriented Passmark GPU compute score is 2,139, which is modest when compared to the OpenCL results, reflecting the card’s limited FP32 throughput of 1.892 TFLOPS.

The 2D performance is captured by a Passmark G2D score of 402, and the overall 3D performance is represented by a Passmark G3D score of 5,543. The 3D score is the most representative of real-world graphics workloads, and it aligns with the card’s position among its nearest rivals. The deltaPct values in the nearestRivals data show that the M3000M is essentially neck-and-neck with the AMD Radeon R7 M260 and the AMD Radeon R5 M320, both of which are within 0.1% of its average score. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M is 0.4% faster, and the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX is 0.7% faster. These margins are negligible in real-world terms, meaning the M3000M performs at parity with these mobile parts despite being a workstation-oriented product.

Ray Tracing and Feature Set

The Quadro M3000M is built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, which predates dedicated ray tracing hardware. The fact pack lists no RT cores and no tensor cores, meaning the GPU relies entirely on traditional rasterization techniques for rendering. Consequently, there is no hardware-accelerated ray tracing support, and any ray-traced workloads would run on the shader units, albeit at significantly reduced performance compared to dedicated RT hardware found in later architectures. The card’s FP32 performance of 1.892 TFLOPS provides the raw compute ceiling for such software-based approaches, but benchmark results indicate this is not a viable path for real-time ray tracing.

The feature set is instead defined by its API support. The GPU supports DirectX 12 (12_1), which includes feature level 12_1, enabling advanced rasterization features like conservative rasterization and rasterizer-ordered views. OpenGL 4.6 is supported, which is crucial for professional applications like CAD and simulation software that rely heavily on this API. Vulkan 1.4 is also listed, providing modern low-level access for cross-platform workloads. The absence of tensor cores means no AI-accelerated features such as DLSS or neural network inference, which are absent from this generation entirely. The card’s 32 ROPs and 64 TMUs provide the texture and pixel throughput necessary for professional viewport rendering, but the lack of any specialized compute units limits its utility in emerging fields like machine learning or real-time ray tracing.

Memory Subsystem

The M3000M is equipped with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 160.4 GB/s. The memory clock is 1,253 MHz, which translates to 5 Gbps effective data rate. This memory configuration is typical for a mid-range mobile workstation GPU from the 2015 era, and it provides a balanced ratio between compute capacity and bandwidth. The 160.4 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for 1080p professional workloads, but it becomes a limiting factor at higher resolutions where texture fetch and framebuffer access demand more throughput.

For high-resolution displays, the data suggests the card can handle 4K viewport rendering in non-textured or lightly textured scenes, but heavy multi-sample anti-aliasing or complex shader workloads will saturate the memory bus quickly. The 4 GB capacity is adequate for most professional applications of the time, though larger datasets or multi-display configurations could exceed this limit. The 256-bit bus width is a positive indicator, as it provides a wider path for data movement compared to narrower 128-bit configurations found in lower-tier mobile parts. However, the bandwidth of 160.4 GB/s is modest when compared to desktop workstation cards of the same generation, and it directly impacts the GPU’s ability to sustain high frame rates in memory-intensive scenarios.

How It Compares

AMD Radeon R7 M260: The M3000M edges out the R7 M260 by a mere 0.1% in average benchmark score, with 4,635 versus 4,630. This effectively puts the two cards at performance parity. The Quadro distinguishes itself through its workstation-oriented feature set, including OpenGL 4.6 support and higher transistor count, but in raw compute and graphics tests, the data shows no meaningful advantage.

AMD Radeon R5 M320: The delta against the R5 M320 is also 0.1%, with the M3000M scoring 4,635 versus 4,629. This is a statistical tie. The M3000M’s Maxwell architecture provides better DirectX 9 performance, but the overall average is nearly identical, suggesting that the two cards compete in the same performance tier despite different architectural approaches.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M: The GTX 970M is 0.4% faster, scoring 4,655 compared to the M3000M’s 4,635. This is a negligible difference, but the GTX 970M is a consumer gaming part, whereas the M3000M targets professional workflows. The Quadro’s advantage lies in its certified drivers and ISV support, not in raw performance metrics.

AMD Radeon R8 M445DX: The R8 M445DX leads by 0.7%, with a score of 4,670 versus 4,635. This is the largest delta among the nearest rivals, but still well within the margin of error for benchmark variance. The data indicates that the M3000M performs consistently with other mid-range mobile GPUs of its era, and its positioning is defined more by its professional feature set than by any performance leadership.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the Quadro M3000M?

A: The average benchmark score is 4,635, placing the GPU in the 25th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: How does the M3000M compare to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M?

A: The GTX 970M is 0.4% faster in average benchmark score, with 4,655 versus 4,635 for the M3000M.

Q: What API versions does the M3000M support?

A: The GPU supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth and bus width of the M3000M?

A: The card has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 160.4 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Does the M3000M have dedicated ray tracing cores?

A: No, the fact pack lists no RT cores or tensor cores, indicating no hardware-accelerated ray tracing support.

Q: What is the FP32 performance of the M3000M?

A: The peak FP32 performance is 1.892 TFLOPS, with a pixel rate of 29.57 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 59.14 GTexel/s.