GeForce GTX 560M SLI vs Quadro K4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Quadro K1200 Quadro K2000 Quadro K2000D Quadro K2200 Quadro K4000 Quadro K4200 Quadro K5000 Quadro K5000 Mac Edition Quadro K5000 SYNC Quadro K5200 Quadro K6000 Quadro K6000 SDI
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GTX 560M GTX 560M SLI GTX 570M GTX 580M GTX 580M SLI

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K4000 with GeForce GTX 560M SLI, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K4000
2013
3 GB GDDR5, 80 Watt
6.09
+7%

K4000 outperforms GTX 560M SLI by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Quadro K4000 Quadro K4000
GTX 560M SLI GTX 560M SLI

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking570584
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.60no data
Power efficiency6.024.50
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGK106N12E-GS
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date1 March 2013 (12 years ago)6 January 2011 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,269 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores768384
Core clock speed810 MHz775 MHz
Number of transistors2,540 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate51.84no data
Floating-point processing power1.244 TFLOPSno data
ROPs24no data
TMUs64no data

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount3 GBno data
Memory bus width192 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1404 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth134.8 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortno data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA3.0-

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 6.09 5.69
Recency 1 March 2013 6 January 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 100 Watt

Quadro K4000 has a 7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro K4000 and GeForce GTX 560M SLI.

Be aware that Quadro K4000 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 560M SLI is a notebook one.

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 GTX 560M SLI
GeForce GTX 560M SLI
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

Quadro K4000 Quadro K4000
vs
GRID K2 GRID K2
GTX 560M SLI GeForce GTX 560M SLI
vs
GTX 470M SLI GeForce GTX 470M SLI
Quadro K4000 Quadro K4000
vs
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
GTX 1050 Max-Q GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
vs
Quadro K2200 Quadro K2200
GT 750M Mac Edition GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition
vs
Quadro K620 Quadro K620
Tesla T4 Tesla T4
vs
Quadro K620 Quadro K620
K5100M Quadro K5100M
vs
Quadro K6000 Quadro K6000
Quadro Quadro
vs
K2000D Quadro K2000D
UHD Graphics UHD Graphics
vs
Quadro K600 Quadro K600
RX Vega 56 Mobile Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile
vs
Tesla K20s Tesla K20s
GTX 550 Ti GeForce GTX 550 Ti
vs
Quadro K5000 Quadro K5000
RTX 4080 GeForce RTX 4080
vs
Tesla C2050 Tesla C2050
RTX 3090 GeForce RTX 3090
vs
Tesla C2075 Tesla C2075

Community ratings

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

3.3 200 votes

Rate Quadro K4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 560M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K4000 or GeForce GTX 560M SLI, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.