Radeon R5 M255 vs Quadro M4000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M4000 with Radeon R5 M255, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M4000
2015
8 GB GDDR5, 120 Watt
17.29
+1144%

M4000 outperforms R5 M255 by a whopping 1144% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3131002
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.46no data
Power efficiency9.98no data
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameGM204Topaz
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date29 June 2015 (9 years ago)12 October 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$791 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 cores1664384
Compute unitsno data5
Core clock speed773 MHz925 MHz
Boost clock speedno data940 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Wattno data
Texture fill rate80.3922.56
Floating-point processing power2.573 TFLOPS0.7219 TFLOPS
ROPs648
TMUs10424

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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0 x8
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length241 mmno data
Width1" (2.5 cm)no data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 192 GB/s16 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 Connectors4x DisplayPortNo outputs
Number of simultaneous displays4no data
Multi-display synchronizationQuadro Syncno data
Eyefinity-+

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration-+
HD3D-+
PowerTune-+
DualGraphics-+
ZeroCore-+
Switchable graphics-+
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
High-Performance Video I/O6+no data
nView Desktop Management+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12DirectX® 11
Shader Model6.46.3
OpenGL4.54.4
OpenCL1.2Not Listed
Vulkan1.1.126-
Mantle-+
CUDA5.2-

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.

Quadro M4000 17.29
+1144%
R5 M255 1.39

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.

Quadro M4000 6671
+1145%
R5 M255 536

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:

900p260−270
+1138%
21
−1138%
Full HD160−170
+1131%
13
−1131%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.94no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 5
+0%
5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9
+0%
9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12
+0%
12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8
+0%
8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21
+0%
21
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5
+0%
5
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8
+0%
8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3
+0%
3
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how Quadro M4000 and R5 M255 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M4000 is 1138% faster in 900p
  • Quadro M4000 is 1131% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 49 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.29 1.39
Recency 29 June 2015 12 October 2014
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB

Quadro M4000 has a 1143.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 months, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Quadro M4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 M255 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M4000 is a workstation card while Radeon R5 M255 is a notebook 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 M4000
Quadro M4000
AMD Radeon R5 M255
Radeon R5 M255

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.


3.6 230 votes

Rate Quadro M4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 65 votes

Rate Radeon R5 M255 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.