Quadro 4000M vs GeForce GTX 960M

Place in performance ranking	460	701
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.49	0.99
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2018)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	N16P-GX	Fermi
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	12 March 2015 (9 years ago)	22 February 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$449
Current price	$799	$118 (0.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 960M has 51% better value for money than Quadro 4000M.

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 cores	640	336
CUDA cores	640	no data
Core clock speed	1096 MHz	475 MHz
Boost clock speed	1202 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,870 million	1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	100 Watt
Texture fill rate	47.04	26.60
Floating-point performance	1,505 gflops	638.4 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 960M and Quadro 4000M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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 size	medium sized	large
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	MXM-B (3.0)
SLI options	+	no data

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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	2500 MHz	1200 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80 GB/s	80 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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
VGA аnalog display support	+	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	+	no data
HDMI	+	no data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream	+	no data
GeForce ShadowPlay	+	no data
GPU Boost	2.0	no data
GameWorks	+	no data
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data
BatteryBoost	+	no data
Ansel	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/A
CUDA	+	2.1

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 960M 8.79
+161%

Quadro 4000M 3.37

GeForce GTX 960M outperforms Quadro 4000M by 161% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 960M 3395
+161%

Quadro 4000M 1302

GeForce GTX 960M outperforms Quadro 4000M by 161% in Passmark.

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 960M 5278
+152%

Quadro 4000M 2092

GeForce GTX 960M outperforms Quadro 4000M by 152% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GTX 960M 10755
+109%

Quadro 4000M 5141

GeForce GTX 960M outperforms Quadro 4000M by 109% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 960M 32
+77.8%

Quadro 4000M 18

GeForce GTX 960M outperforms Quadro 4000M by 78% in Octane Render OctaneBench.

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:

900p	95 +171%	35−40 −171%
Full HD	36 −97.2%	71 +97.2%
1440p	14 +180%	5−6 −180%
4K	14 +180%	5−6 −180%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16

no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	25	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14	no data
Battlefield 5	30	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16	no data
Far Cry 5	28	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	31	no data
Forza Horizon 4	35	no data
Hitman 3	16−18	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40	no data
Metro Exodus	31	no data
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35	no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	19	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14	no data
Battlefield 5	23	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16	no data
Far Cry 5	24	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	23	no data
Forza Horizon 4	71	no data
Hitman 3	16−18	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40	no data
Metro Exodus	25	no data
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30	no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35	no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	11	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16	no data
Far Cry 5	18	no data
Forza Horizon 4	25	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30	no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35	no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

24−27

no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	16	no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5	no data
Far Cry 5	15	no data
Forza Horizon 4	18	no data
Hitman 3	12−14	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20	no data
Metro Exodus	15 +200%	5−6 −200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5	no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	7	no data
Hitman 3	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5	no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10 +233%	3−4 −233%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	4	no data
Forza Horizon 4	10−12	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10	no data
Metro Exodus	6	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4	no data

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10

no data

This is how GTX 960M and Quadro 4000M compete in popular games:

GTX 960M is 171% faster in 900p
Quadro 4000M is 97% faster in 1080p
GTX 960M is 180% faster in 1440p
GTX 960M is 180% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.79	3.37
Recency	12 March 2015	22 February 2011
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	100 Watt