Quadro K1000M vs NVS 5400M

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

NVS 5400M
1.62

Quadro K1000M outperforms NVS 5400M by 25% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking904838
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money0.050.15
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameN13P-NS1N14P-Q1
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date1 June 2012 (11 years old)1 June 2012 (11 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$119.90
Current price$381 $232 (1.9x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

K1000M has 200% better value for money than NVS 5400M.

Technical specs

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 cores96192
Core clock speed660 MHz850 MHz
Number of transistors585 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate10.5613.60
Floating-point performance253.4 gflops326.4 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on NVS 5400M and Quadro K1000M 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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
InterfaceMXMMXM-A (3.0)

Memory

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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHz1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/s28.8 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 outputsNo outputs

Technologies

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

Optimusno data+

API support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A+
CUDA++

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.

NVS 5400M 1.62
K1000M 2.02
+24.7%

Quadro K1000M outperforms NVS 5400M by 25% in our combined 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%

NVS 5400M 628
K1000M 783
+24.7%

Quadro K1000M outperforms NVS 5400M by 25% in Passmark.

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%

NVS 5400M 5198
+0.6%
K1000M 5165

NVS 5400M outperforms Quadro K1000M by 1% 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%

NVS 5400M 1119
+1.5%
K1000M 1102

NVS 5400M outperforms Quadro K1000M by 2% 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%

NVS 5400M 2377
+42.3%
K1000M 1670

NVS 5400M outperforms Quadro K1000M by 42% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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:

900p7−8
−28.6%
9
+28.6%
Full HD17
−5.9%
18
+5.9%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 0−1 1−2
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Hitman 3 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 0−1 1−2
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Hitman 3 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 0−1 1−2
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 1−2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hitman 3 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 1−2

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 1−2
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 1−2
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how NVS 5400M and K1000M compete in popular games:

900p resolution:

  • K1000M is 28.6% faster than NVS 5400M

1080p resolution:

  • K1000M is 5.9% faster than NVS 5400M

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the K1000M is 200% faster than the NVS 5400M.

All in all, in popular games:

  • K1000M is ahead in 26 tests (68%)
  • there's a draw in 12 tests (32%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 1.62 2.02
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 45 Watt

The Quadro K1000M is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 5400M in performance tests.


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

User ratings

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


NVIDIA NVS 5400M
NVS 5400M
NVIDIA Quadro K1000M
Quadro K1000M

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User ratings: view and submit

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


3.7 40 votes

Rate NVIDIA NVS 5400M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 68 votes

Rate NVIDIA Quadro K1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

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