Radeon RX 7900M vs Quadro 4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
4000 4000 Mac Edition 5000 5000 SDI 6000 6000 SDI Tesla C2050 Tesla C2070 Tesla M2050 Tesla M2070 Tesla M2070-Q Tesla S2050
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
7600M 7600M XT 7600S 7700S 7800M 7900M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 4000 with Radeon RX 7900M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 4000
2010, $1,199
2 GB GDDR5, 142 Watt
3.52

7900M outperforms 4000 by a whopping 1402% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
RX 7900M RX 7900M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking77964
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.08no data
Power efficiency1.9122.62
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameGF100Navi 31
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date2 November 2010 (15 years ago)19 October 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 no data

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 cores2564608
Core clock speed475 MHz1825 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2090 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)142 Watt180 Watt
Texture fill rate15.20601.9
Floating-point processing power0.4864 TFLOPS38.52 TFLOPS
ROPs32192
TMUs32288
Ray Tracing Coresno data72
L0 Cacheno data2.3 MB
L1 Cache512 KB3 MB
L2 Cache512 KB6 MB
L3 Cacheno data64 MB

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 datalarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed702 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth89.86 GB/s576.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.2
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA2.0-

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.

Quadro 4000 3.52
RX 7900M 52.87
+1402%

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 1470
Samples: 2287
RX 7900M 22111
+1404%
Samples: 54

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 HD9−10
−1544%
148
+1544%
1440p7−8
−1429%
107
+1429%
4K4−5
−1725%
73
+1725%

Cost per frame, $

1080p133.22no data
1440p171.29no data
4K299.75no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Fortnite 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Fortnite 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 139
+0%
139
+0%
Metro Exodus 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Valorant 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 135
+0%
135
+0%
Far Cry 5 128
+0%
128
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 168
+0%
168
+0%
Valorant 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 106
+0%
106
+0%
Metro Exodus 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 93
+0%
93
+0%
Far Cry 5 123
+0%
123
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 146
+0%
146
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 116
+0%
116
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 44
+0%
44
+0%
Far Cry 5 103
+0%
103
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

This is how Quadro 4000 and RX 7900M compete in popular games:

  • RX 7900M is 1544% faster in 1080p
  • RX 7900M is 1429% faster in 1440p
  • RX 7900M is 1725% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 57 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 3.52 52.87
Recency 2 November 2010 19 October 2023
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 142 Watt 180 Watt

Quadro 4000 has 27% lower power consumption.

RX 7900M, on the other hand, has a 1402% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7900M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 4000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 7900M is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

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

Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
FirePro W4100 FirePro W4100
RX 7900M Radeon RX 7900M
vs
RTX 5070 Ti Mobile GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
Quadro K2000 Quadro K2000
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
ATI X740 XL Radeon X740 XL
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
ATI X700 XT Radeon X700 XT
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
Parhelia 256 MB
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
ATI Mobility HD 5670 Mac Edition Radeon HD 5670 Mac Edition
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
RTX 4090 Mobile RTX 4090 Mobile
FX 380 LP Quadro FX 380 LP
vs
R5 340 OEM R5 340 OEM
FX 380 LP Quadro FX 380 LP
vs
R7 350X OEM R7 350X OEM
FX 380 LP Quadro FX 380 LP
vs
HD 8670 OEM HD 8670 OEM
FX 380 LP Quadro FX 380 LP
vs
HD 6450 HD 6450
FX 380 LP Quadro FX 380 LP
vs
R9 M370X Mac Edition R9 M370X Mac Edition

Community ratings

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

3.5 203 votes

Rate Quadro 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 93 votes

Rate Radeon RX 7900M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro 4000 or Radeon RX 7900M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.