NVIDIA Quadro M1000M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M1000M and NVIDIA Quadro K4000M 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 M1000M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 2 month(s) later
• Around 65% higher core clock speed: 993 MHz vs 601 MHz
• 2.5x lower typical power consumption: 40 Watt vs 100 Watt
• Around 79% higher memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 2800 MHz
• Around 50% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2851 vs 1903
• Around 4% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 307 vs 296
• Around 52% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 8849 vs 5827
• 3.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 38.33 vs 10.054
• Around 32% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 721.18 vs 544.601
• 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.056 vs 1.46
• Around 94% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 42.938 vs 22.103
• 3.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 137.786 vs 36.553
• Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4196 vs 3855
• Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4196 vs 3855

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M

• Around 51% higher texture fill rate: 48.08 GTexel / s vs 31.78 GTexel / s
• Around 88% higher pipelines: 960 vs 512
• Around 13% better floating-point performance: 1,154 gflops vs 1,017 gflops
• 2048x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB / 4 GB
• Around 33% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 4957 vs 3716
• Around 33% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 4470 vs 3358
• Around 33% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 4957 vs 3716
• Around 33% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 4470 vs 3358

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M1000M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K4000M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2851 1903
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	307 296
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	8849 5827
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	38.33 10.054
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	721.18 544.601
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.056 1.46
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	42.938 22.103
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	137.786 36.553
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4196 3855
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3716 4957
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 4470
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4196 3855
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3716 4957
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 4470

Compare specifications (specs)