Quadro 4000M vs K4100M

Place in performance ranking	515	689
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.64	0.97
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	N15E-Q3-A2	Fermi
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	23 July 2013 (10 years ago)	22 February 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,499	$449
Current price	$323 (0.2x MSRP)	$118 (0.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

K4100M has 69% better value for money than Quadro 4000M.

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 cores	1152	336
Core clock speed	706 MHz	475 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	100 Watt
Texture fill rate	67.78	26.60
Floating-point performance	1,627 gflops	638.4 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro K4100M and Quadro 4000M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	large	large
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	MXM-B (3.0)

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	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	3200 MHz	1200 MHz
Memory bandwidth	102.4 GB/s	80 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	No outputs	No outputs
Display Port	1.2	no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	no data
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5	5.1
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	+	N/A
CUDA	+	2.1

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.

K4100M 7.07
+106%

Quadro 4000M 3.43

K4100M outperforms 4000M by 106% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

K4100M 2735
+106%

Quadro 4000M 1328

K4100M outperforms 4000M by 106% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

K4100M 19909
+85.7%

Quadro 4000M 10722

K4100M outperforms 4000M by 86% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

K4100M 4957
+137%

Quadro 4000M 2092

K4100M outperforms 4000M by 137% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

K4100M 9097
+77%

Quadro 4000M 5141

K4100M outperforms 4000M by 77% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

K4100M 26
+44.4%

Quadro 4000M 18

K4100M outperforms 4000M by 44% in Octane Render OctaneBench.

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	48 −47.9%	71 +47.9%
4K	13 +117%	6−7 −117%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−12
+83.3%

6−7

−83.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Battlefield 5	21−24 +188%	8−9 −188%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +53.8%	12−14 −53.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +200%	6−7 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +140%	10−11 −140%
Hitman 3	16−18 +143%	7−8 −143%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +60%	10−11 −60%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Battlefield 5	21−24 +188%	8−9 −188%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +53.8%	12−14 −53.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +200%	6−7 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +140%	10−11 −140%
Hitman 3	16−18 +143%	7−8 −143%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +60%	10−11 −60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Battlefield 5	21−24 +188%	8−9 −188%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +200%	6−7 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +140%	10−11 −140%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%
Hitman 3	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 +30%	10−11 −30%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 +42.9%	7−8 −42.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Battlefield 5	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +120%	5−6 −120%
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Hitman 3	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3−4	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Battlefield 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1