FirePro M4000 vs GeForce 9800 GT
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 9800 GT with FirePro M4000, including specs and performance data.
M4000 outperforms 9800 GT by a whopping 233% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1135 | 778 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.06 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.71 | 8.98 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
| GPU code name | G92 | Chelsea |
| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 21 July 2008 (18 years ago) | 27 June 2012 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $160 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 112 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 675 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 754 million | 1,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 33 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 33.60 | 21.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.336 TFLOPS | 0.6912 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 56 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 64 KB | 256 KB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Bus support | no data | n/a |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-A (3.0) |
| Length | 229 mm | no data |
| Height | 1-slot | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Form factor | no data | MXM-A |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |
| SLI options | + | - |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 57.6 GB/s | 72 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | HDTVDual Link DVI | No outputs |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| StereoOutput3D | - | + |
| Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | + | - |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 8−9
−70.4%
| 27 |
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 20.00 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9 | 8−9 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 9−10 | 9−10 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 5−6 | 5−6 |
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9 | 8−9 |
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12 | 10−12 |
| Fortnite | 21−24 | 21−24 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20 | 18−20 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 9−10 | 9−10 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18 | 16−18 |
| Valorant | 50−55 | 50−55 |
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 65−70 | 65−70 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9 | 8−9 |
| Dota 2 | 35−40 | 35−40 |
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12 | 10−12 |
| Fortnite | 21−24 | 21−24 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20 | 18−20 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14 | 12−14 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 9−10 | 9−10 |
| Metro Exodus | 7−8 | 7−8 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18 | 16−18 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14 | 12−14 |
| Valorant | 50−55 | 50−55 |
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9 | 8−9 |
| Dota 2 | 35−40 | 35−40 |
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12 | 10−12 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20 | 18−20 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 9−10 | 9−10 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18 | 16−18 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14 | 12−14 |
| Valorant | 50−55 | 50−55 |
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 21−24 | 21−24 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8 | 7−8 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 27−30 | 27−30 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3 | 2−3 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3 | 2−3 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35 | 30−35 |
| Valorant | 35−40 | 35−40 |
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 2−3 |
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8 | 7−8 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10 | 9−10 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6 | 5−6 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 7−8 | 7−8 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18 | 16−18 |
| Valorant | 16−18 | 16−18 |
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 1−2 |
| Dota 2 | 12−14 | 12−14 |
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5 | 4−5 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5 | 4−5 |
This is how 9800 GT and FirePro M4000 compete in popular games:
- FirePro M4000 is 238% faster in 1080p
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 57 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.14 | 3.80 |
| Recency | 21 July 2008 | 27 June 2012 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 33 Watt |
FirePro M4000 has a 233% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 57% more advanced lithography process, and 69% lower power consumption.
The FirePro M4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9800 GT in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce 9800 GT is a desktop graphics card while FirePro M4000 is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
