NVIDIA Quadro M4000M vs NVIDIA Quadro K2200M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M4000M and NVIDIA Quadro K2200M 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) 0 month(s) later
- Around 46% higher core clock speed: 975 MHz vs 667 MHz
- 2.9x more texture fill rate: 78 GTexel / s vs 26.68 GTexel / s
- 2x more pipelines: 1,280 vs 640
- 2.9x better floating-point performance: 2,496 gflops vs 853.8 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 76% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6146 vs 3501
- Around 13% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 413 vs 367
- Around 85% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 19918 vs 10787
- Around 60% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7602 vs 4750
- Around 60% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7602 vs 4750
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 18 August 2015 vs 19 July 2014 |
| Core clock speed | 975 MHz vs 667 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 78 GTexel / s vs 26.68 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1,280 vs 640 |
| Floating-point performance | 2,496 gflops vs 853.8 gflops |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6146 vs 3501 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 413 vs 367 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 19918 vs 10787 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7602 vs 4750 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3093 vs 3084 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7602 vs 4750 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3093 vs 3084 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K2200M
- Around 54% lower typical power consumption: 65 Watt vs 100 Watt
- Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3720 vs 2749
- Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3720 vs 2749
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt vs 100 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3720 vs 2749 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3720 vs 2749 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2200M
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 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 Quadro K2200M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6146 | 3501 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 413 | 367 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 19918 | 10787 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 81.104 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1235.338 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.157 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 68.443 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 251.464 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7602 | 4750 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2749 | 3720 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3093 | 3084 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7602 | 4750 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2749 | 3720 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3093 | 3084 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro M4000M | NVIDIA Quadro K2200M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Maxwell |
| Code name | GM204 | GM107 |
| Launch date | 18 August 2015 | 19 July 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 551 | 549 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1013 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 975 MHz | 667 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 2,496 gflops | 853.8 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1,280 | 640 |
| Texture fill rate | 78 GTexel / s | 26.68 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5,200 million | 1,870 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| Display Port | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-A (3.0) |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 160 GB / s | 80 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 5012 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro M4000M with others
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
ATIRadeon X1300 PRO
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 670
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
AMDRadeon HD 8970M
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
NVIDIAGRID K260Q
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
NVIDIAQuadro K2200M
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960A
