Radeon HD 7770M vs Quadro 4000M

Place in the ranking	728	722
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.32	no data
Power efficiency	2.33	7.42
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code name	GF104	Chelsea
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	22 February 2011 (13 years ago)	24 April 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$449	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores	336	512
Core clock speed	475 MHz	675 MHz
Number of transistors	1,950 million	1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	32 Watt
Texture fill rate	26.60	21.60
Floating-point processing power	0.6384 TFLOPS	0.6912 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	56	32

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 size	large	medium sized
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16

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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	625 MHz	1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80 GB/s	64 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 Connectors

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (11_1)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	2.1	-

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. 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

HD 7770M 3.43
+1.8%

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

HD 7770M 2110
+0.9%

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
+2.4%

HD 7770M 10468

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
+1.4%

70−75

−1.4%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

6.32

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7

+0%

6−7

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Battlefield 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −5.3%	20−22 +5.3%
Hitman 3	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 −4.2%	24−27 +4.2%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −2.5%	40−45 +2.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Battlefield 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −5.3%	20−22 +5.3%
Hitman 3	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 −4.2%	24−27 +4.2%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −2.5%	40−45 +2.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −5.3%	20−22 +5.3%
Hitman 3	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 −4.2%	24−27 +4.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −2.5%	40−45 +2.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9

−12.5%

9−10
+12.5%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	1−2
Hitman 3	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	20−22 −5%	21−24 +5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8

+0%

7−8

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

+0%

4−5

+0%

This is how Quadro 4000M and HD 7770M compete in popular games:

Quadro 4000M is 1% faster in 1080p

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

in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD 7770M is 50% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD 7770M is ahead in 25 tests (40%)
there's a draw in 37 tests (60%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.37	3.43
Recency	22 February 2011	24 April 2012
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	32 Watt

Quadro 4000M has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

HD 7770M, on the other hand, has a 1.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 212.5% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro 4000M and Radeon HD 7770M.

Be aware that Quadro 4000M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon HD 7770M is a mobile workstation one.

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