NVIDIA Quadro M4000M vs AMD Radeon R7 260

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M4000M and AMD Radeon R7 260 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 M4000M

  • Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 8 month(s) later
  • Around 63% higher texture fill rate: 78 GTexel / s vs 48 GTexel / s
  • Around 67% higher pipelines: 1,280 vs 768
  • Around 63% better floating-point performance: 2,496 gflops vs 1,536 gflops
  • Around 15% lower typical power consumption: 100 Watt vs 115 Watt
  • 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
  • 3.1x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 1625 MHz
  • 2.1x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6186 vs 2892
  • 3.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 81.104 vs 26.189
  • Around 55% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1235.338 vs 798.239
  • Around 46% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.157 vs 4.223
  • Around 51% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 68.443 vs 45.294
  • Around 5% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 251.464 vs 240.395
Specifications (specs)
Launch date 18 August 2015 vs 17 December 2013
Texture fill rate 78 GTexel / s vs 48 GTexel / s
Pipelines 1,280 vs 768
Floating-point performance 2,496 gflops vs 1,536 gflops
Thermal Design Power (TDP) 100 Watt vs 115 Watt
Maximum memory size 4 GB vs 2 GB
Memory clock speed 5012 MHz vs 1625 MHz
Benchmarks
PassMark - G3D Mark 6186 vs 2892
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) 81.104 vs 26.189
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 1235.338 vs 798.239
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) 6.157 vs 4.223
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) 68.443 vs 45.294
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 251.464 vs 240.395

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 260

  • Around 9% higher boost clock speed: 1100 MHz vs 1013 MHz
  • Around 34% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 559 vs 417
Specifications (specs)
Boost clock speed 1100 MHz vs 1013 MHz
Benchmarks
PassMark - G2D Mark 559 vs 417

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 260

PassMark - G3D Mark
GPU 1
GPU 2
6186
2892
PassMark - G2D Mark
GPU 1
GPU 2
417
559
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)
GPU 1
GPU 2
81.104
26.189
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)
GPU 1
GPU 2
1235.338
798.239
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)
GPU 1
GPU 2
6.157
4.223
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)
GPU 1
GPU 2
68.443
45.294
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)
GPU 1
GPU 2
251.464
240.395
Name NVIDIA Quadro M4000M AMD Radeon R7 260
PassMark - G3D Mark 6186 2892
PassMark - G2D Mark 417 559
Geekbench - OpenCL 19212
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) 81.104 26.189
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 1235.338 798.239
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) 6.157 4.223
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) 68.443 45.294
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 251.464 240.395
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) 7602
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) 2749
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) 3093
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) 7602
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) 2749
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) 3093
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score 0

Compare specifications (specs)

NVIDIA Quadro M4000M AMD Radeon R7 260

Essentials

Architecture Maxwell 2.0 GCN 2.0
Code name GM204 Bonaire
Launch date 18 August 2015 17 December 2013
Place in performance rating 552 555
Type Mobile workstation Desktop
Design AMD Radeon R7 200 Series
Launch price (MSRP) $109
Price now $89.99
Value for money (0-100) 44.11

Technical info

Boost clock speed 1013 MHz 1100 MHz
Core clock speed 975 MHz
Floating-point performance 2,496 gflops 1,536 gflops
Manufacturing process technology 28 nm 28 nm
Pipelines 1,280 768
Texture fill rate 78 GTexel / s 48 GTexel / s
Thermal Design Power (TDP) 100 Watt 115 Watt
Transistor count 5,200 million 2,080 million
Stream Processors 896

Video outputs and ports

Display Connectors No outputs 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Display Port 1.2
DisplayPort support
Dual-link DVI support
Eyefinity
HDMI
VGA

Compatibility, dimensions and requirements

Interface PCIe 3.0 x16 PCIe 3.0 x16
Laptop size large
Supplementary power connectors None 1 x 6-pin
Bus support PCIe 3.0
Length 170 mm

API support

DirectX 12 12
OpenGL 4.5 4.5
Shader Model 5.0
Vulkan

Memory

Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Memory bandwidth 160 GB / s 104 GB/s
Memory bus width 256 Bit 128 Bit
Memory clock speed 5012 MHz 1625 MHz
Memory type GDDR5 GDDR5
Shared memory 0

Technologies

3D Vision Pro
Mosaic
nView Display Management
Optimus
AMD Eyefinity
DDMA audio
FreeSync