GRID K1 vs Quadro 4000M

Place in performance ranking	698	895
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.98	0.07
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	Fermi	GK107
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	22 February 2011 (13 years ago)	18 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$449	$4,140
Current price	$118 (0.3x MSRP)	$317 (0.1x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro 4000M has 1300% better value for money than GRID K1.

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	336	192
Core clock speed	475 MHz	850 MHz
Number of transistors	1,950 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	130 Watt
Texture fill rate	26.60	13.60
Floating-point performance	638.4 gflops	4x 326.4 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro 4000M and GRID K1 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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	large	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 6-pin

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	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1200 MHz	1782 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80 GB/s	28.51 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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

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	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.1.126
CUDA	2.1	3.0

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.

Quadro 4000M 3.37
+101%

GRID K1 1.68

Quadro 4000M outperforms GRID K1 by 101% 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%

Quadro 4000M 1302
+100%

GRID K1 650

Quadro 4000M outperforms GRID K1 by 100% in Passmark.

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 HD

71
+103%

35−40

−103%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7
+200%

2−3

−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%
Hitman 3	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +122%	9−10 −122%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +117%	6−7 −117%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 +125%	8−9 −125%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%
Hitman 3	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +122%	9−10 −122%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +117%	6−7 −117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 +125%	8−9 −125%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +122%	9−10 −122%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +117%	6−7 −117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 +125%	8−9 −125%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
+167%

3−4

−167%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Hitman 3	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+133%

3−4

−133%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+300%

1−2

−300%

This is how Quadro 4000M and GRID K1 compete in popular games:

Quadro 4000M is 103% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.37	1.68
Recency	22 February 2011	18 March 2013
Cost	$449	$4140
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	130 Watt