NVIDIA Quadro M4000 vs AMD Radeon R9 270
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M4000 and AMD Radeon R9 270 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 M4000
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 7 month(s) later
- Around 9% higher texture fill rate: 80.39 GTexel / s vs 74 GTexel / s
- Around 30% higher pipelines: 1664 vs 1280
- Around 9% better floating-point performance: 2,573 gflops vs 2,368 gflops
- Around 25% lower typical power consumption: 120 Watt vs 150 Watt
- 4x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 55% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6672 vs 4306
- Around 19% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 674 vs 567
- Around 18% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 65.548 vs 55.721
- Around 82% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6291 vs 3448
- Around 82% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6291 vs 3448
- Around 44% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2302 vs 1603
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 29 June 2015 vs 13 November 2013 |
Texture fill rate | 80.39 GTexel / s vs 74 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1664 vs 1280 |
Floating-point performance | 2,573 gflops vs 2,368 gflops |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt vs 150 Watt |
Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 2 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6672 vs 4306 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 674 vs 567 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 65.548 vs 55.721 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6291 vs 3448 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6291 vs 3448 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2302 vs 1603 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 270
- 4x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 74175 vs 18372
- Around 75% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1282.039 vs 732.046
- Around 9% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.927 vs 5.453
- 5.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 93.116 vs 17.725
- Around 20% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 261.843 vs 217.357
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 74175 vs 18372 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1282.039 vs 732.046 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.927 vs 5.453 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 93.116 vs 17.725 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 261.843 vs 217.357 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3699 vs 3685 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3347 vs 3332 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3699 vs 3685 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3347 vs 3332 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M4000
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 270
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 |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA Quadro M4000 | AMD Radeon R9 270 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6672 | 4306 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 674 | 567 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 18372 | 74175 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 65.548 | 55.721 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 732.046 | 1282.039 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.453 | 5.927 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 17.725 | 93.116 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 217.357 | 261.843 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6291 | 3448 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3685 | 3699 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3332 | 3347 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6291 | 3448 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3685 | 3699 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3332 | 3347 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2302 | 1603 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA Quadro M4000 | AMD Radeon R9 270 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | GM204 | Curacao |
Launch date | 29 June 2015 | 13 November 2013 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $791 | $179 |
Place in performance rating | 524 | 521 |
Price now | $765.93 | |
Type | Workstation | Desktop |
Value for money (0-100) | 10.68 | |
Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 773 MHz | |
Floating-point performance | 2,573 gflops | 2,368 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 1664 | 1280 |
Texture fill rate | 80.39 GTexel / s | 74 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt | 150 Watt |
Transistor count | 5,200 million | 2,800 million |
Boost clock speed | 925 MHz | |
Stream Processors | 1280 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 4x DisplayPort, DP DP DP DP 3-pin Stereo | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
Multi-display synchronization | Quadro Sync | |
Number of simultaneous displays | 4 | |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
Eyefinity | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 241 mm | 210 mm |
SLI options | 1 | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1 x 6-pin | 1 x 6-pin |
Width | 1" (2.5 cm) | |
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 5 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 6008 MHz | |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Memory bandwidth | 179.2 GB/s | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision Pro | ||
High-Performance Video I/O6 | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Desktop Management | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync | ||
HD3D | ||
LiquidVR | ||
TressFX | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) |