Quadro T1000 vs FirePro M4000

Place in the ranking	683	320
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	8.67	23.14
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Chelsea	TU117
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	27 June 2012 (12 years ago)	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	512	no data
Core clock speed	675 MHz	1395 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1455 MHz
Number of transistors	1,500 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	33 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	21.60	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.6912 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	32	no data

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	medium sized	no data
Bus support	n/a	no data
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x16
Form factor	MXM-A	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1000 MHz	8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	72 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	-	no data

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
StereoOutput3D	+	-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (11_1)	12.0 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FirePro M4000 4.13

Quadro T1000 16.71
+305%

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.

FirePro M4000 1593

Quadro T1000 6448
+305%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

FirePro M4000 5532

Quadro T1000 33866
+512%

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

−300%

100−110
+300%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

7−8
−286%

27−30

+286%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −275%	45−50 +275%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −300%	12−14 +300%
Battlefield 5	10−11 −300%	40−45 +300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −289%	35−40 +289%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −286%	27−30 +286%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −289%	35−40 +289%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 −264%	40−45 +264%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −300%	100−105 +300%
Hitman 3	9−10 −289%	35−40 +289%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −293%	110−120 +293%
Metro Exodus	8−9 −275%	30−33 +275%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −264%	40−45 +264%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −275%	60−65 +275%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −295%	170−180 +295%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −275%	45−50 +275%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −300%	12−14 +300%
Battlefield 5	10−11 −300%	40−45 +300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −289%	35−40 +289%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −286%	27−30 +286%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −289%	35−40 +289%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 −264%	40−45 +264%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −300%	100−105 +300%
Hitman 3	9−10 −289%	35−40 +289%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −293%	110−120 +293%
Metro Exodus	8−9 −275%	30−33 +275%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −264%	40−45 +264%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −275%	60−65 +275%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −275%	60−65 +275%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −295%	170−180 +295%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −275%	45−50 +275%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −300%	12−14 +300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −289%	35−40 +289%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −286%	27−30 +286%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −289%	35−40 +289%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −300%	100−105 +300%
Hitman 3	9−10 −289%	35−40 +289%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −293%	110−120 +293%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −275%	60−65 +275%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −275%	60−65 +275%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −295%	170−180 +295%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12

−264%

40−45
+264%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −275%	30−33 +275%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −300%	24−27 +300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −300%	16−18 +300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −300%	12−14 +300%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −260%	18−20 +260%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −300%	24−27 +300%
Hitman 3	9−10 −289%	35−40 +289%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −300%	40−45 +300%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −300%	12−14 +300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 −285%	100−105 +285%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
−275%

30−33

+275%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −300%	12−14 +300%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −300%	12−14 +300%
Hitman 3	0−1	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −300%	12−14 +300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −300%	12−14 +300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
−260%

18−20

+260%

This is how FirePro M4000 and Quadro T1000 compete in popular games:

Quadro T1000 is 300% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.13	16.71
Recency	27 June 2012	27 May 2019
Chip lithography	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	33 Watt	50 Watt

FirePro M4000 has 51.5% lower power consumption.

Quadro T1000, on the other hand, has a 304.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro T1000 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro M4000 is a mobile workstation card while Quadro T1000 is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.