NVIDIA Quadro P4000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop)
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P4000 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop) 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 P4000
- Videocard is newer: launch date 7 month(s) later
- Around 50% lower typical power consumption: 100 Watt vs 150 Watt
- 950.5x more memory clock speed: 7604 MHz vs 8 GB/s
- Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 152.325 vs 150.951
- Around 63% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 45.977 vs 28.289
- Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 751.626 vs 710.366
- Around 11% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 15267 vs 13765
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3714 vs 3691
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3340
- Around 11% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 15267 vs 13765
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3714 vs 3691
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3340
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 6 February 2017 vs 10 June 2016 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt vs 150 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 7604 MHz vs 8 GB/s |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.325 vs 150.951 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 45.977 vs 28.289 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 751.626 vs 710.366 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 15267 vs 13765 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 vs 3691 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3340 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 15267 vs 13765 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 vs 3691 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3340 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop)
- Around 25% higher core clock speed: 1506 MHz vs 1202 MHz
- Around 14% higher boost clock speed: 1683 MHz vs 1480 MHz
- Around 22% higher texture fill rate: 202.0 GTexel / s vs 165.8 GTexel / s
- Around 7% higher pipelines: 1920 vs 1792
- Around 22% better floating-point performance: 6,463 gflops vs 5,304 gflops
- Around 16% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 13498 vs 11624
- Around 4% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 847 vs 815
- Around 12% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 47301 vs 42289
- Around 8% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1718.593 vs 1590.392
- Around 8% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 12.283 vs 11.365
- Around 24% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 6066 vs 4904
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1506 MHz vs 1202 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1683 MHz vs 1480 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 202.0 GTexel / s vs 165.8 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1920 vs 1792 |
Floating-point performance | 6,463 gflops vs 5,304 gflops |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 13498 vs 11624 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 847 vs 815 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 47301 vs 42289 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1718.593 vs 1590.392 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 12.283 vs 11.365 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 6066 vs 4904 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P4000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop)
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 P4000 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop) |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 11624 | 13498 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 815 | 847 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 42289 | 47301 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.325 | 150.951 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1590.392 | 1718.593 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.365 | 12.283 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 45.977 | 28.289 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 751.626 | 710.366 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 15267 | 13765 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | 3691 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3340 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 15267 | 13765 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | 3691 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3340 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 4904 | 6066 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA Quadro P4000 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop) | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Pascal | Pascal |
Code name | GP104 | GP104 |
Launch date | 6 February 2017 | 10 June 2016 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $815 | $379 |
Place in performance rating | 286 | 284 |
Price now | $799.99 | $359.99 |
Type | Workstation | Desktop |
Value for money (0-100) | 17.17 | 45.72 |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1480 MHz | 1683 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1202 MHz | 1506 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 5,304 gflops | 6,463 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 16 nm |
Pipelines | 1792 | 1920 |
Texture fill rate | 165.8 GTexel / s | 202.0 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt | 150 Watt |
Transistor count | 7,200 million | 7,200 million |
CUDA cores | 1920 | |
Maximum GPU temperature | 94 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 4x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, DP 1.42, HDMI 2.0b, Dual Link-DVI |
Display Port | 1.4 | |
G-SYNC support | ||
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 241 mm | 10.5" (26.7 cm) |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 8-pin |
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 500 Watt | |
Width | 2-slot | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 5.1 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 8 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 192 GB / s | 256 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 7604 MHz | 8 GB/s |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
3D Stereo | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus | ||
3D Vision | ||
Ansel | ||
CUDA | ||
GPU Boost | ||
ShadowWorks | ||
SLI | ||
Virtual Reality |