ATI FirePro M7740 vs Quadro K4000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K4000M and FirePro M7740, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

K4000M
2012
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
4.92
+148%

K4000M outperforms ATI M7740 by a whopping 148% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking657910
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.752.51
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGK104M97
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date1 June 2012 (13 years ago)4 August 2009 (16 years ago)

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 cores960640
Core clock speed601 MHz650 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million826 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate48.0820.80
Floating-point processing power1.154 TFLOPS0.832 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8032

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 sizelargelarge
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz846 MHz
Memory bandwidth89.6 GB/s54.14 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA+-

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.

K4000M 4.92
+148%
ATI M7740 1.98

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.

K4000M 15362
+132%
ATI M7740 6626

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 HD47
+161%
18−20
−161%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+667%
3−4
−667%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
God of War 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+667%
3−4
−667%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Fortnite 30−33
+233%
9−10
−233%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+109%
10−12
−109%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
God of War 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
Valorant 60−65
+56.4%
35−40
−56.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+667%
3−4
−667%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 85−90
+110%
40−45
−110%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Dota 2 40−45
+90.9%
21−24
−90.9%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Fortnite 30−33
+233%
9−10
−233%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+109%
10−12
−109%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
God of War 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Valorant 60−65
+56.4%
35−40
−56.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Dota 2 40−45
+90.9%
21−24
−90.9%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+109%
10−12
−109%
God of War 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Valorant 60−65
+56.4%
35−40
−56.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−33
+233%
9−10
−233%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+171%
14−16
−171%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6 0−1
Metro Exodus 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+80%
20−22
−80%
Valorant 55−60
+267%
14−16
−267%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
God of War 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+13.3%
14−16
−13.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Valorant 24−27
+150%
10−11
−150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Far Cry 5 4−5 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
God of War 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

This is how K4000M and ATI M7740 compete in popular games:

  • K4000M is 161% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the K4000M is 667% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, K4000M surpassed ATI M7740 in all 55 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.92 1.98
Recency 1 June 2012 4 August 2009
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 60 Watt

K4000M has a 148.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

ATI M7740, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K4000M is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M7740 in performance tests.

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 K4000M
Quadro K4000M
ATI FirePro M7740
FirePro M7740

Other comparisons

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.


3.4 14 votes

Rate Quadro K4000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate FirePro M7740 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K4000M or FirePro M7740, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.