RTX A4000 vs Quadro M1000M

Place in the ranking	536	59
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	4.19	no data
Power efficiency	12.76	24.94
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GM107	GA104
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	18 August 2015 (9 years ago)	12 April 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$200.89	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 cores	512	6144
Core clock speed	993 MHz	735 MHz
Boost clock speed	1072 MHz	1560 MHz
Number of transistors	1,870 million	17,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	140 Watt
Texture fill rate	31.78	299.5
Floating-point processing power	1.017 TFLOPS	19.17 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	96
TMUs	32	192
Tensor Cores	no data	192
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	48

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 size	large	no data
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	241 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB/4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80 GB/s	448.0 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	4x DisplayPort 1.4a
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	+	-
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.7
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	+	1.3
CUDA	5.0	8.6

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. 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.

M1000M 7.40

RTX A4000 50.61
+584%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

M1000M 2844

RTX A4000 19459
+584%

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.

M1000M 8550

RTX A4000 121328
+1319%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

M1000M 7964

RTX A4000 111312
+1298%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

M1000M 8471

RTX A4000 124547
+1370%

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	39 −567%	260−270 +567%
4K	16 −525%	100−110 +525%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	5.15	no data
4K	12.56	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −567%	100−105 +567%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −567%	100−105 +567%
Elden Ring	20−22 −550%	130−140 +550%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 −567%	160−170 +567%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −567%	100−105 +567%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −567%	100−105 +567%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 −567%	200−210 +567%
Metro Exodus	18−20 −532%	120−130 +532%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −567%	140−150 +567%
Valorant	24−27 −567%	160−170 +567%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 −567%	160−170 +567%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −567%	100−105 +567%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −567%	100−105 +567%
Dota 2	24−27 −554%	170−180 +554%
Elden Ring	20−22 −550%	130−140 +550%
Far Cry 5	30−35 −567%	220−230 +567%
Fortnite	40−45 −582%	300−310 +582%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 −567%	200−210 +567%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 −554%	170−180 +554%
Metro Exodus	18−20 −532%	120−130 +532%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 −567%	400−450 +567%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −567%	140−150 +567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −552%	150−160 +552%
Valorant	24−27 −567%	160−170 +567%
World of Tanks	110−120 −564%	750−800 +564%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 −567%	160−170 +567%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −567%	100−105 +567%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −567%	100−105 +567%
Dota 2	24−27 −554%	170−180 +554%
Far Cry 5	30−35 −567%	220−230 +567%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 −567%	200−210 +567%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 −567%	400−450 +567%
Valorant	24−27 −567%	160−170 +567%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	8−9 −525%	50−55 +525%
Elden Ring	10−11 −550%	65−70 +550%
Grand Theft Auto V	8−9 −525%	50−55 +525%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −567%	260−270 +567%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%
World of Tanks	50−55 −560%	350−400 +560%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −554%	85−90 +554%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −550%	65−70 +550%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −567%	100−105 +567%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −579%	95−100 +579%
Metro Exodus	10−12 −582%	75−80 +582%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −567%	60−65 +567%
Valorant	18−20 −532%	120−130 +532%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Dota 2	18−20 −567%	120−130 +567%
Elden Ring	4−5 −575%	27−30 +575%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 −567%	120−130 +567%
Metro Exodus	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 −567%	140−150 +567%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −567%	120−130 +567%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%
Counter-Strike 2	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
Dota 2	18−20 −567%	120−130 +567%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −567%	60−65 +567%
Fortnite	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −525%	50−55 +525%
Valorant	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%

This is how M1000M and RTX A4000 compete in popular games:

RTX A4000 is 567% faster in 1080p
RTX A4000 is 525% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.40	50.61
Recency	18 August 2015	12 April 2021
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB/4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	140 Watt

M1000M has 250% lower power consumption.

RTX A4000, on the other hand, has a 583.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M1000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M1000M is a mobile workstation card while RTX A4000 is a workstation one.

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