Quadro K4000M vs GeForce GTX 460 768MB

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

GTX 460 768MB
4.38

Quadro K4000M outperforms GeForce GTX 460 768MB by 16% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary Details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in performance ranking627588
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluationno data1.09
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameno dataN14E-Q3
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release dateno data1 June 2012 (11 years ago)
Current price$149 $240

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed Specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores336960
Core clock speed675 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistorsno data3,540 million
Manufacturing process technologyno data28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data100 Watt
Texture fill rateno data48.08
Floating-point performanceno data1,154 gflops

Form Factor & Compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 460 768MB and Quadro K4000M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Interfaceno dataMXM-B (3.0)

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHz2800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data89.6 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

Supported GPU Technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimusno data+

API Compatibility

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

DirectX1112 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkanno data+
CUDAno data+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

GTX 460 768MB 4.38
K4000M 5.06
+15.5%

Quadro K4000M outperforms GeForce GTX 460 768MB by 16% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 460 768MB 12262
K4000M 15362
+25.3%

Quadro K4000M outperforms GeForce GTX 460 768MB by 25% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 460 768MB 2811
K4000M 3466
+23.3%

Quadro K4000M outperforms GeForce GTX 460 768MB by 23% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 460 768MB 2092
K4000M 2199
+5.1%

Quadro K4000M outperforms GeForce GTX 460 768MB by 5% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 460 768MB 17589
K4000M 19058
+8.4%

Quadro K4000M outperforms GeForce GTX 460 768MB by 8% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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 HD47
+0%
47
+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Battlefield 5 12−14
−25%
14−16
+25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
Hitman 3 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Battlefield 5 12−14
−25%
14−16
+25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
Hitman 3 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Metro Exodus 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Battlefield 5 12−14
−25%
14−16
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hitman 3 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 1−2

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

This is how GTX 460 768MB and K4000M compete in popular games:

  • K4000M is 0% faster than GTX 460 768MB in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the K4000M is 66.7% faster than the GTX 460 768MB.

All in all, in popular games:

  • K4000M is ahead in 46 tests (77%)
  • there's a draw in 14 tests (23%)

Pros & Cons Summary


Performance score 4.38 5.06

The Quadro K4000M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 460 768MB in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 460 768MB is a desktop card while Quadro K4000M is a mobile workstation one.


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

Vote for Your Favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 768MB
GeForce GTX 460 768MB
NVIDIA Quadro K4000M
Quadro K4000M

Comparisons with Similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community Ratings

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 90 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 460 768MB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 13 votes

Rate Quadro K4000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & Сomments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.