GeForce GTS 240 OEM vs Quadro K4000

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking551not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.58no data
Power efficiency6.05no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGK106G92B
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date1 March 2013 (11 years ago)1 July 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,269 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 cores768112
Core clock speed810 MHz675 MHz
Number of transistors2,540 million754 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate51.8437.80
Floating-point processing power1.244 TFLOPS0.3629 TFLOPS
ROPs2416
TMUs6456

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length241 mm229 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount3 GB1 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1404 MHz1100 MHz
Memory bandwidth134.8 GB/s70.4 GB/s

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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA3.01.1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 March 2013 1 July 2009
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 120 Watt

Quadro K4000 has an age advantage of 3 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro K4000 and GeForce GTS 240 OEM. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro K4000 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTS 240 OEM is a desktop one.


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

Vote for your favorite

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


NVIDIA Quadro K4000
Quadro K4000
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 240 OEM
GeForce GTS 240 OEM

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

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


3.3 197 votes

Rate Quadro K4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 30 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 240 OEM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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