Quadro FX 4000 vs GeForce GTX 950A

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 950A with Quadro FX 4000, including specs and performance data.

GTX 950A
2015
2 GB DDR3, 75 Watt
6.18
+2475%

950A outperforms FX 4000 by a whopping 2475% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6211424
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.350.13
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameGM107NV40
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date13 March 2015 (10 years ago)1 April 2004 (21 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores640no data
Core clock speed993 MHz375 MHz
Boost clock speed1124 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million222 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt142 Watt
Texture fill rate44.964.500
Floating-point processing power1.439 TFLOPSno data
ROPs168
TMUs4012
L1 Cache320 KBno data
L2 Cache2 MBno 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).

InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)AGP 8x
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x Molex

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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB256 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1001 MHz500 MHz
Memory bandwidth32.03 GB/s32 GB/s

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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA5.0-

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.

GTX 950A 6.18
+2475%
FX 4000 0.24

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.

GTX 950A 2598
+2472%
Samples: 70
FX 4000 101
Samples: 1

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.18 0.24
Recency 13 March 2015 1 April 2004
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 142 Watt

GTX 950A has a 2475% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 89.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 950A is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 950A is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 4000 is a workstation one.

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 950A
GeForce GTX 950A
NVIDIA Quadro FX 4000
Quadro FX 4000

Other comparisons

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 ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 13 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 950A on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 22 votes

Rate Quadro FX 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 950A or Quadro FX 4000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.