NVIDIA Quadro K3100M vs NVIDIA Quadro CX
We compared two Professional market GPUs: 4GB VRAM Quadro K3100M and 1536MB VRAM Quadro CX to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
NVIDIA Quadro K3100M 's Advantages
Released 4 years and 8 months late
More VRAM (4GB vs 1536GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (102.4GB/s vs 76.80GB/s)
576 additional rendering cores
Lower TDP (75W vs 150W)
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
Quadro K3100M
+134%
1.084 TFLOPS
Quadro CX
0.462 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Jul 2013
Release Date
Nov 2008
Quadro Mobile
Generation
Quadro CX
Professional
Type
Professional
MXM-B (3.0)
Bus Interface
PCIe 2.0 x16
Clock Speeds
-
-
-
-
-
-
800 MHz
Memory Clock
800 MHz
Memory
4GB
Memory Size
1536MB
GDDR5
Memory Type
GDDR3
256bit
Memory Bus
384bit
102.4GB/s
Bandwidth
76.80GB/s
Render Config
-
-
-
-
SM Count
24
768
Shading Units
192
64
TMUs
64
32
ROPs
24
-
-
-
-
-
-
16 KB (per SMX)
L1 Cache
-
512 KB
L2 Cache
192 KB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
11.30 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
14.45 GPixel/s
45.18 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
38.53 GTexel/s
-
-
-
1084 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
462.3 GFLOPS
45.18 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
57.79 GFLOPS
Board Design
75W
TDP
150W
-
Suggested PSU
450 W
No outputs
Outputs
1x DVI
2x DisplayPort
1x S-Video
-
Power Connectors
1x 6-pin
Graphics Processor
GK104
GPU Name
GT200B
N15E-Q1-A2
GPU Variant
-
Kepler
Architecture
Tesla 2.0
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
28 nm
Process Size
55 nm
3.54 billion
Transistors
1.4 billion
294 mm²
Die Size
470 mm²
Graphics Features
12 (11_0)
DirectX
11.1 (10_0)
4.6
OpenGL
3.3
3.0
OpenCL
1.1
1.1
Vulkan
N/A
3.0
CUDA
1.3
5.1
Shader Model
4.0
