NVIDIA Quadro P4000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P4000 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop) 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 5 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 10% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 11545 vs 10465
- Around 32% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 795 vs 603
- 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 15 August 2016 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt vs 150 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 7604 MHz vs 8 GB/s |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 11545 vs 10465 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 795 vs 603 |
| 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 (Laptop)
- Around 25% higher core clock speed: 1506 MHz vs 1202 MHz
- Around 11% higher boost clock speed: 1645 MHz vs 1480 MHz
- Around 27% higher texture fill rate: 210.6 GTexel / s vs 165.8 GTexel / s
- Around 14% higher pipelines: 2048 vs 1792
- Around 27% better floating-point performance: 6,738 gflops vs 5,304 gflops
- Around 12% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 47476 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
- 5x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 5536 vs 1115
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1506 MHz vs 1202 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1645 MHz vs 1480 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 210.6 GTexel / s vs 165.8 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2048 vs 1792 |
| Floating-point performance | 6,738 gflops vs 5,304 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 47476 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 | 5536 vs 1115 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P4000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
| 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 (Laptop) |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 11545 | 10465 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 795 | 603 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 42289 | 47476 |
| 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 | 1115 | 5536 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro P4000 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop) | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Pascal |
| Code name | GP104 | GP104B |
| Launch date | 6 February 2017 | 15 August 2016 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $815 | $389.99 |
| Place in performance rating | 287 | 290 |
| Price now | $799.99 | $359.99 |
| Type | Workstation | Laptop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 17.17 | 43.18 |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1480 MHz | 1645 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1202 MHz | 1506 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 5,304 gflops | 6,738 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 16 nm |
| Pipelines | 1792 | 2048 |
| Texture fill rate | 165.8 GTexel / s | 210.6 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 | 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 | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Laptop size | large | |
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 | ||
| Multi Monitor | ||
| Multi-Projection | ||
| ShadowWorks | ||
| SLI | ||
| Virtual Reality | ||
| VR Ready | ||

