GeForce GT 220 vs Quadro 4000M

Place in performance ranking	691	1173
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.97	no data
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	GT2xx (2009−2012)
GPU code name	Fermi	GT216
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	22 February 2011 (13 years ago)	12 October 2009 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$449	$79.99
Current price	$118 (0.3x MSRP)	$121 (1.5x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro 4000M and GT 220 have a nearly equal value for money.

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	48
CUDA cores	no data	48
Core clock speed	475 MHz	625 MHz
Number of transistors	1,950 million	486 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	58 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105 °C
Texture fill rate	26.60	9.840
Floating-point performance	638.4 gflops	144 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro 4000M and GeForce GT 220 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
Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	6.6" (16.8 cm)
Height	no data	4.376" (11.1 cm)
Width	no data	1-slot

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	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1200 MHz	790 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80 GB/s	25.3 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	VGADVIHDMI
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	no data	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	S/PDIF + HDA

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	5.1	4.1
OpenGL	4.6	3.1
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	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.

Quadro 4000M 3.43
+513%

GT 220 0.56

Quadro 4000M outperforms GeForce GT 220 by 513% based on our aggregated 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 1328
+518%

GT 220 215

Quadro 4000M outperforms GeForce GT 220 by 518% 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
+238%

−238%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7
+100%

3−4

−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Far Cry 5	6−7	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Hitman 3	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6−7	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Far Cry 5	6−7	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Hitman 3	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6−7	0−1
Metro Exodus	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4	0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Far Cry 5	6−7	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Hitman 3	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Far Cry New Dawn	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	2−3	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Hitman 3	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1

This is how Quadro 4000M and GT 220 compete in popular games:

Quadro 4000M is 238% faster in 1080p

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro 4000M is 400% faster than the GT 220.

All in all, in popular games:

Quadro 4000M is ahead in 24 tests (96%)
there's a draw in 1 test (4%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.43	0.56
Recency	22 February 2011	12 October 2009
Cost	$449	$79.99
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	58 Watt