GeForce MX130 vs Quadro 4000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 4000 with GeForce MX130, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 4000
2010
2 GB GDDR5, 142 Watt
3.75

MX130 outperforms 4000 by a significant 24% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking714653
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.19no data
Power efficiency1.8510.86
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGF100GM108
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date2 November 2010 (14 years ago)17 November 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores256384
Core clock speed475 MHz1122 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1242 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)142 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate15.2029.81
Floating-point processing power0.4864 TFLOPS0.9539 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs3224

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

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 amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed702 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth89.86 GB/s40.1 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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D 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/A1.1.126
CUDA2.0+

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.

Quadro 4000 3.75
GeForce MX130 4.64
+23.7%

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.

Quadro 4000 1474
GeForce MX130 1824
+23.7%

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.

Quadro 4000 5017
GeForce MX130 6557
+30.7%

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 HD14−16
−28.6%
18
+28.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p85.64no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 12
+0%
12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
+0%
4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 8
+0%
8
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 14
+0%
14
+0%
Fortnite 32
+0%
32
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 23
+0%
23
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3
+0%
3
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 35
+0%
35
+0%
Far Cry 5 13
+0%
13
+0%
Fortnite 24
+0%
24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
+0%
15
+0%
Metro Exodus 3
+0%
3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21
+0%
21
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+0%
14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14
+0%
14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+0%
7
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16
+0%
16
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how Quadro 4000 and GeForce MX130 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce MX130 is 29% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.75 4.64
Recency 2 November 2010 17 November 2017
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 142 Watt 30 Watt

GeForce MX130 has a 23.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 373.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX130 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 4000 is a workstation card while GeForce MX130 is a notebook 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 Quadro 4000
Quadro 4000
NVIDIA GeForce MX130
GeForce MX130

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.


3.5 188 votes

Rate Quadro 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 2308 votes

Rate GeForce MX130 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro 4000 or GeForce MX130, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.