NVIDIA Quadro K4000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K4000 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K4000
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- 4.9x more texture fill rate: 51.84 GTexel / s vs 10.6 billion / sec
- 5.3x more pipelines: 768 vs 144
- 3.7x better floating-point performance: 1,244 gflops vs 339.8 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 4.5x more memory clock speed: 5616 MHz vs 1250 MHz
- 3.4x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2721 vs 811
- 2.1x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 424 vs 203
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3651 vs 3274
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3651 vs 3274
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 1 March 2013 vs 3 September 2010 |
| Texture fill rate | 51.84 GTexel / s vs 10.6 billion / sec |
| Pipelines | 768 vs 144 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,244 gflops vs 339.8 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
| Memory clock speed | 5616 MHz vs 1250 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2721 vs 811 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 424 vs 203 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3651 vs 3274 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3651 vs 3274 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M
- Around 46% higher core clock speed: 1180 MHz vs 810 MHz
- 2.3x lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 80 Watt
- Around 85% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 12379 vs 6674
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3350 vs 3321
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3350 vs 3321
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1180 MHz vs 810 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt vs 80 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 12379 vs 6674 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 vs 3321 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 vs 3321 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K4000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro K4000 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2721 | 811 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 424 | 203 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6674 | 12379 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.462 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 427.88 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.899 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 23.742 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 61.965 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3798 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3651 | 3274 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3321 | 3350 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3798 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3651 | 3274 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3321 | 3350 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 817 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro K4000 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | Fermi |
| Code name | GK106 | GF106 |
| Launch date | 1 March 2013 | 3 September 2010 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,269 | |
| Place in performance rating | 866 | 867 |
| Price now | $225.65 | |
| Type | Workstation | Laptop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 14.81 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 810 MHz | 1180 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 1,244 gflops | 339.8 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 768 | 144 |
| Texture fill rate | 51.84 GTexel / s | 10.6 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 80 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Transistor count | 2,540 million | 1,170 million |
| CUDA cores | 144 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 241 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
| Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 API |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | 3 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 134.8 GB / s | 60.0 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 192 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5616 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DirectCompute | ||
| DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
| Optimus | ||
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro K4000 with others
NVIDIAQuadro K4000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce Go 7800
NVIDIAQuadro K4000 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 2300
NVIDIAQuadro K4000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 445M
NVIDIAQuadro K4000 vs
AMDRadeon R5 235X OEM
NVIDIAQuadro K4000 vs
AMDRadeon R9 M295X Mac Edition
NVIDIAQuadro K4000 vs
AMDRadeon R9 M380
