GeForce 840M vs Quadro K4000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K4000M with GeForce 840M, including specs and performance data.

K4000M
2012
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
5.08
+80.1%

K4000M outperforms GeForce 840M by an impressive 80% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking623794
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameN14E-Q3N15S-GT
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date1 June 2012 (12 years ago)12 March 2014 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores960384
Core clock speed600 MHz1029 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt33 Watt
Texture fill rate48.0817.98
Floating-point performance1.154 gflops0.8632 gflops

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x8

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed2800 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth89.6 GB/s16.02 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boostno data2.0
Optimus++
GameWorks-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.1.126
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

K4000M 5.08
+80.1%
GeForce 840M 2.82

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

K4000M 1960
+79.8%
GeForce 840M 1090

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
+114%
GeForce 840M 7191

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.

K4000M 3466
+48.1%
GeForce 840M 2340

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

K4000M 2199
+39.8%
GeForce 840M 1573

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

K4000M 19058
+118%
GeForce 840M 8724

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.

K4000M 5525
GeForce 840M 5719
+3.5%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

K4000M 4650
GeForce 840M 5561
+19.6%

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

K4000M 37
+62.2%
GeForce 840M 23

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.

K4000M 22
+83.3%
GeForce 840M 12

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 HD45
+150%
18
−150%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+113%
14−16
−113%
Hitman 3 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+45.5%
21−24
−45.5%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+23.7%
35−40
−23.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+113%
14−16
−113%
Hitman 3 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+45.5%
21−24
−45.5%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
−27.8%
23
+27.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+23.7%
35−40
−23.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+113%
14−16
−113%
Hitman 3 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+45.5%
21−24
−45.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+200%
6
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+23.7%
35−40
−23.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Hitman 3 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+88.2%
16−18
−88.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

This is how K4000M and GeForce 840M compete in popular games:

  • K4000M is 150% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the K4000M is 400% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce 840M is 28% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • K4000M is ahead in 59 tests (97%)
  • GeForce 840M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.08 2.82
Recency 1 June 2012 12 March 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 33 Watt

K4000M has a 80.1% higher aggregate performance score.

GeForce 840M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 203% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K4000M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 840M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K4000M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce 840M 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.

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
NVIDIA GeForce 840M
GeForce 840M

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.


3.4 14 votes

Rate Quadro K4000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 878 votes

Rate GeForce 840M 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.