Quadro K4000M vs Quadro 5000

Place in the ranking	634	633
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.15	no data
Power efficiency	2.29	3.49
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	GF100	GK104
Market segment	Workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	23 February 2011 (13 years ago)	1 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$2,499	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	352	960
Core clock speed	513 MHz	601 MHz
Number of transistors	3,100 million	3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	152 Watt	100 Watt
Texture fill rate	22.57	48.08
Floating-point processing power	0.7223 TFLOPS	1.154 TFLOPS
ROPs	40	32
TMUs	44	80

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	no data	large
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Length	248 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no data

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	2.5 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	320 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	750 MHz	700 MHz
Memory bandwidth	120.0 GB/s	89.6 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

1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort

No outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API compatibility

List of supported 3D 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	+
CUDA	2.0	+

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 5000 5.04

K4000M 5.07
+0.6%

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 5000 1938

K4000M 1947
+0.5%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro 5000 7349
+26.1%

K4000M 5827

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 5000 31
+40.9%

K4000M 22

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

40−45

−2.5%

41
+2.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

62.48

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Elden Ring	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Valorant	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Elden Ring	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Fortnite	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Valorant	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
World of Tanks	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Valorant	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Elden Ring	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
World of Tanks	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Valorant	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Elden Ring	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Fortnite	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Valorant	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

This is how Quadro 5000 and K4000M compete in popular games:

K4000M is 3% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.04	5.07
Recency	23 February 2011	1 June 2012
Maximum RAM amount	2.5 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	152 Watt	100 Watt

K4000M has a 0.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 60% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 52% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro 5000 and Quadro K4000M.

Be aware that Quadro 5000 is a workstation card while Quadro K4000M 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.