4000M vs K1100M

General info

Comparison of graphics card architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters.

Place in our rating
Value for money (0-100)
GPU code name
Market segment
Mobile workstation
Mobile workstation
Launch date
22 February 2011 (10 years ago)
23 July 2013 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)
Price now
$118 (0.3x MSRP)
$350 (3.2x MSRP)

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 cores
Core clock speed
475 MHz
705 MHz
Number of transistors
1,950 million
1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology
40 nm
28 nm
Thermal design power (TDP)
100 Watt
45 Watt
Texture fill rate
Floating-point performance
638.4 gflops
542.2 gflops

Compatibility, dimensions and requirements

Information on Quadro 4000M and Quadro K1100M 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 size
medium sized
MXM-B (3.0)
MXM-A (3.0)


Parameters of memory installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Note that GPUs integrated into processors have no dedicated VRAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type
Maximum RAM amount
2 GB
2 GB
Memory bus width
256 Bit
128 Bit
Memory clock speed
1200 MHz
2800 MHz
Memory bandwidth
80 GB/s
44.8 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 Connectors
No outputs
No outputs
Display Port
no data


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

3D Vision Pro
no data
no data
nView Display Management
no data
no data

API support

APIs supported, including particular versions of those APIs.

12 (11_0)
Shader Model

Benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. Note that overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range.

Overall score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. 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 4.96 +17.3%
K1100M 4.23

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.

Quadro 4000M 2092 +14.5%
K1100M 1827

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.

Quadro 4000M 10722 +19.2%
K1100M 8992


This is probably the most ubiquitous benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various 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 4000M 1294 +17.1%
K1100M 1105

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Quadro 4000M 18 +100%
K1100M 9

Rendering quality tests

GFXBench render quality
4541 +0%
4541 +0%
GFXBench high precision render quality
4541 +0%
4541 +0%

Mining hashrates

Cryptocurrency mining performance of Quadro 4000M and Quadro K1100M. Usually measured in megahashes per second.

Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256)
82 Mh/s +355.6%
18 Mh/s −355.6%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Quadro 4000M satisfies 75% minimum and 64% recommended requirements of all games known to us.


K1100M satisfies 73% minimum and 62% recommended requirements of all games known to us.


Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Quadro 4000M
71 +294.4%
18 −294.4%

Competitors of Quadro 4000M from AMD

The nearest Quadro 4000M's AMD equivalent is FirePro M5950, which is faster by 1% and higher by 10 positions in our rating.

Here are some closest AMD rivals to Quadro 4000M:

Competitors of Quadro K1100M from AMD

We believe that the nearest equivalent to Quadro K1100M from AMD is FirePro W4190M, which is slower by 1% and lower by 3 positions in our rating.

Here are some closest AMD rivals to Quadro K1100M:

Advantages of NVIDIA Quadro 4000M

17.3% better performance in benchmarks

Cheaper ($118 vs $350)

Wider memory bus (256 vs 128 bit)

Higher memory bandwidth (80 vs 44.8 GB/s)

Advantages of NVIDIA Quadro K1100M

Much newer (23 July 2013 vs 22 February 2011)

More pipelines (384 vs 336)

Finer manufacturing process technology (28 vs 40 nm)

Lower power consumption (45W vs 100W), meaning that the rival with higher TDP might require a better cooler or other thermal solution.

Optimus (lowers energy usage by automatically switching between integrated and discrete NVIDIA GPU. Similar to AMD Enduro)

PhysX (hardware acceleration of physical simulation engine named PhysX)

CUDA (Compute Unified Device Architecture - an API for video card computing power usage in tasks different from 3D graphics processing. Can be used for physics simulation for instance)

Vulkan (a contemporary API for graphics acceleration, based on now-discontinued Mantle)

So, which one is the better GPU?

Judging by the results of synthetic and gaming tests, Technical City recommends NVIDIA Quadro 4000M, since it shows better performance.

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

Cast your vote

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

NVIDIA Quadro 4000M
NVIDIA Quadro K1100M

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of video cards with performance more or less close to those reviewed, providing you with more probable options to consider.

User rating

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

Advices and comments

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