NVIDIA Quadro 4000M vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro 4000M and NVIDIA Quadro 2000 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 month(s) later
• Around 33% higher texture fill rate: 26.6 GTexel / s vs 20 GTexel / s
• Around 75% higher pipelines: 336 vs 192
• Around 33% better floating-point performance: 638.4 gflops vs 480.0 gflops
• 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
• Around 40% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1328 vs 949
• Around 32% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5141 vs 3902
• 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 21.42 vs 10.267
• 2.9x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 738.724 vs 258.26
• 2.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.068 vs 0.885
• 2.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 33.126 vs 13.688
• 4.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 81.823 vs 19.02

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 2000

• Around 32% higher core clock speed: 625 MHz vs 475 MHz
• Around 61% lower typical power consumption: 62 Watt vs 100 Watt
• Around 4% higher memory clock speed: 2600 MHz vs 2500 MHz
• Around 9% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 301 vs 275
• Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1600 vs 1413
• Around 94% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1682 vs 865
• 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2668 vs 1254
• Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1600 vs 1413
• Around 94% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1682 vs 865
• 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2668 vs 1254

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro 4000M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 2000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1328 949
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	275 301
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	5141 3902
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	21.42 10.267
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	738.724 258.26
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.068 0.885
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	33.126 13.688
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	81.823 19.02
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1413 1600
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	865 1682
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1254 2668
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1413 1600
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	865 1682
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1254 2668

Compare specifications (specs)