OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£610VRAM:6 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):60 W

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q Review: Compare 117 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

6.6/10

Overall score

Score
6.6/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
Score components

40%

5.3

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.6, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.8, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–¼Worse than 78% of graphics cards
6.8

Value for money

Value for money
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components

70%

6.6

Overall score

30%

7.3

Price

â–¼Worse than 82%
5.3

Technical score

Technical score
5.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
Score components

44%

3.5

Performance

24%

3.9

Memory

12%

9.2

Power

11%

8.7

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

8.3

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 80%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.6.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £610
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q

Technical score
Technical score
5.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
Score components:

44%

3.5

Performance

24%

3.9

Memory

12%

9.2

Power

11%

8.7

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

8.3

Connectivity

5.3
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components:

70%

6.6

Overall score

30%

7.3

Price

6.8
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
5,387 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 5,387 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 84% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
3,680 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 3,680 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 76.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
8,132 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 8,132 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 88.5% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
2,714 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 2,714 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 92.4% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
4.67 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 4.67 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 88.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
6 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 6 GB of VRAM, which is less than 82.5% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
192 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 192 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 31.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 18.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
288 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 288 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 69.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.5% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
12,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 12,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 80.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.8% of graphics cards and equal to 77.2% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
?
DisplayPort version
1.4
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4, which is older than on 80.8% of graphics cards and equal to 13.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
8.1 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 8.1 Gbps, which is slower than on 65.3% of graphics cards and equal to 22.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
60 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 60 W, which is lower than that of 95.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
60 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 60 W under peak load, which is lower than 96.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
?
Board power limit
60 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 60 W, which is lower than that of 96.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
60 W
Show more
Size
82x 105x 4.8 mm
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 72.1% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (60 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    60 W vs 215 W
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 96 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (240 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    240 vs 144
  • 72.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (60 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    60 W vs 220 W
  • Supports virtual GPU
    This graphics card supports virtual GPU features, the average graphics card does not.
  • 72.7% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (60 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    60 W vs 220 W
  • More NVENC sessions
    This graphics card has more concurrent NVENC sessions than the average graphics card (Unlimited vs 8). The average graphics card has 8 concurrent NVENC sessions.
    Unlimited vs 8
  • 58.3% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (5 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    5 W vs 12 W
  • 96 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (240 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    240 vs 144
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • Supports virtual GPU
    This graphics card supports virtual GPU features, the average graphics card does not.
  • More NVENC sessions
    This graphics card has more concurrent NVENC sessions than the average graphics card (Unlimited vs 8). The average graphics card has 8 concurrent NVENC sessions.
    Unlimited vs 8
  • 72.1% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (60 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    60 W vs 215 W
  • 72.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (60 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    60 W vs 220 W
  • 72.7% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (60 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    60 W vs 220 W
  • 58.3% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (5 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    5 W vs 12 W
  • 51.5% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,215 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,215 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 6 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (6 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    6 GB vs 12 GB
  • 68.8% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (600 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    600 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 2.4x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (12 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    12 nm vs 5 nm
  • 61.4% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (145.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    145.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 10 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (30 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    30 vs 40
  • 64 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (120 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    120 vs 184
  • 8.3% worse value for money
    NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.84 vs 7.4).
    6.84 vs 7.41
  • 51.5% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,215 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,215 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 68.8% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (600 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    600 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 61.4% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (145.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    145.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 10 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (30 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    30 vs 40
  • 64 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (120 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    120 vs 184
  • 51.8% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (77.8 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    77.76 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 79.3% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (4.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    4.67 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 10 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (30 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    30 vs 40
  • 64.1% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (8,132 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    8,132 points vs 22,638 points
  • 4 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2019 vs 2023).
    May 2019
    2019 vs 2023
  • 63.5% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (5,387 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    5,387 points vs 14,779 points
  • 59.8% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (3,680 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    3,680 points vs 9,148 points
  • 77.5% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (2,714 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    2,714 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 68.8% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.2 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.15 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 68.4% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (9.3 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    9.33 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 2,432 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1920 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,920 vs 4,352
  • 6 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (6 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    6 GB vs 12 GB
  • 36.8% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (12,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    12,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 35.7% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 87.5% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (3 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    3 MB vs 24 MB
  • 14.3% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,500 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,500 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 50% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (64 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    64 KB vs 128 KB
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 2.4x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (12 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    12 nm vs 5 nm
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3 vs 4
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • 51.4% larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (445 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    445 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • 52.8% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (10,800 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    10,800 million vs 22,900 million
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1a).
    2.0b vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 1.4a).
    1.4 vs 1.4a
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • No HDMI output
    This graphics card does not include HDMI output, the average graphics card does.
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (4 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    4 vs 6
  • 62.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 33 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (33 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    33 dB vs 0 dB
  • 8 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (75 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    75 °C vs 67 °C
  • 4.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (40 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    40 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q

  • Strong professional performance for workstation tasks (rendering, CAD, 3D modeling)
  • Efficient power consumption (60W max) suitable for thin and light mobile laptops
  • Includes dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor cores for AI/machine learning
  • Decent gaming capabilities, handling high settings well
  • Supports modern features like DLSS and DirectX 12 Ultimate

What customers don't like about NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q

  • Performance is lower than consumer-focused RTX 2070 (mobile) due to lower clock speeds
  • Only 6GB GDDR6 memory may be limiting for very heavy VRAM intensive tasks
  • Confusing marketing surrounding specific power limits (TGP) on different laptop models
  • Slightly older technology compared to newer mobile GPU generations

Verdict

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q is a high-end professional graphics card for mobile workstations based on the 12nm Turing architecture (TU106 chip), featuring 1,920 CUDA cores, 240 Tensor cores, and 30 Ray Tracing cores. It is equipped with 6GB of GDDR6 VRAM on a 192-bit bus, offering a memory bandwidth of 288 GB/s and a power-efficient TDP typically rated at 60W. Its primary strengths lie in certified drivers for professional software stability (CAD, DCC) and support for advanced features like real-time ray tracing and DLSS in a slim laptop form factor. However, its main drawbacks include lower clock speeds (600 MHz base to 1215 MHz boost) compared to standard mobile variants and reduced gaming performance relative to its consumer-grade GeForce counterparts due to less frequent driver updates for entertainment.

Compare NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found