NVIDIA Quadro M4000M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M4000M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M 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 10 month(s) later
- Around 6% higher core clock speed: 975 MHz vs 924 MHz
- 2x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 2500 MHz
- Around 8% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6186 vs 5722
- Around 7% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 417 vs 391
- Around 4% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 19159 vs 18376
- Around 36% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 81.104 vs 59.428
- Around 11% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1235.338 vs 1113.788
- Around 48% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.157 vs 4.157
- Around 75% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 68.443 vs 39.101
- 3.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 251.464 vs 81.909
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 18 August 2015 vs 7 October 2014 |
| Core clock speed | 975 MHz vs 924 MHz |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 2500 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6186 vs 5722 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 417 vs 391 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 19159 vs 18376 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 81.104 vs 59.428 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1235.338 vs 1113.788 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.157 vs 4.157 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 68.443 vs 39.101 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 251.464 vs 81.909 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M
- Around 2% higher boost clock speed: 1038 MHz vs 1013 MHz
- Around 6% higher texture fill rate: 83.04 GTexel / s vs 78 GTexel / s
- Around 6% better floating-point performance: 2,657 gflops vs 2,496 gflops
- Around 23% lower typical power consumption: 81 Watt vs 100 Watt
- Around 50% higher maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 4 GB
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8546 vs 7602
- Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3699 vs 2749
- Around 8% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3342 vs 3093
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8546 vs 7602
- Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3699 vs 2749
- Around 8% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3342 vs 3093
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Boost clock speed | 1038 MHz vs 1013 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 83.04 GTexel / s vs 78 GTexel / s |
| Floating-point performance | 2,657 gflops vs 2,496 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 81 Watt vs 100 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 6 GB vs 4 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8546 vs 7602 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3699 vs 2749 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3342 vs 3093 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8546 vs 7602 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3699 vs 2749 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3342 vs 3093 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro M4000M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6186 | 5722 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 417 | 391 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 19159 | 18376 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 81.104 | 59.428 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1235.338 | 1113.788 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.157 | 4.157 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 68.443 | 39.101 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 251.464 | 81.909 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7602 | 8546 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2749 | 3699 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3093 | 3342 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7602 | 8546 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2749 | 3699 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3093 | 3342 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 2283 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro M4000M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Code name | GM204 | GM204 |
| Launch date | 18 August 2015 | 7 October 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 552 | 548 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,560.89 | |
| Price now | $1,899 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 3.99 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1013 MHz | 1038 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 975 MHz | 924 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 2,496 gflops | 2,657 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1,280 | 1280 |
| Texture fill rate | 78 GTexel / s | 83.04 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt | 81 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5,200 million | 5,200 million |
| CUDA cores | 1280 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| Display Port | 1.2 | |
| DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | 1 | |
| G-SYNC support | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA аnalog display support | 1 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Laptop size | large | large |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| SLI options | 1 | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | |
| Vulkan | ||
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 160 GB / s | 120 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 2500 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
| Ansel | ||
| BatteryBoost | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DSR | ||
| GameStream | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro M4000M with others
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 540
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 4850
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 680
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
AMDRadeon R7 260
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
AMDRadeon RX 460 (Desktop)
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
