Arc B580 vs Quadro M4000M

Place in the ranking	347	107
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	92.85
Power efficiency	11.02	14.63
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	Xe2 (2025)
GPU code name	GM204	BMG-G21
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	18 August 2015 (9 years ago)	16 January 2025 (recently)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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	1,280	2560
Core clock speed	975 MHz	2670 MHz
Boost clock speed	1013 MHz	2670 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	19,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	78.00	427.2
Floating-point processing power	2.496 TFLOPS	13.67 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	80
TMUs	80	160
Tensor Cores	no data	160
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	20

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	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	no data	272 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 8-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	4 GB	12 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	2375 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160 GB/s	456.0 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	1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI	-	+
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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.6
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	+	1.4
CUDA	5.2	-
DLSS	-	+

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.

M4000M 15.35

Arc B580 38.77
+153%

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.

M4000M 6146

Arc B580 15526
+153%

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	75 −66.7%	125 +66.7%
1440p	27−30 −159%	70 +159%
4K	20 −110%	42 +110%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	1.99
1440p	no data	3.56
4K	no data	5.93

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −430%	143 +430%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −150%	80−85 +150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −104%	100−110 +104%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −333%	117 +333%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −150%	80−85 +150%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −146%	160−170 +146%
Forza Horizon 5	40−45 −145%	100−110 +145%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −118%	95−100 +118%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −103%	75−80 +103%
Valorant	65−70 −149%	160−170 +149%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −104%	100−110 +104%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −285%	104 +285%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −150%	80−85 +150%
Dota 2	55−60 −146%	140 +146%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −21.1%	69 +21.1%
Fortnite	85−90 −98.9%	170−180 +98.9%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −146%	160−170 +146%
Forza Horizon 5	40−45 −145%	100−110 +145%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 −146%	140−150 +146%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +22.2%	36 −22.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −79.6%	200−210 +79.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −103%	75−80 +103%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 −194%	140−150 +194%
Valorant	65−70 −149%	160−170 +149%
World of Tanks	200−210 −38.1%	270−280 +38.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −104%	100−110 +104%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −252%	95 +252%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −150%	80−85 +150%
Dota 2	55−60 −146%	140−150 +146%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −73.7%	95−100 +73.7%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −146%	160−170 +146%
Forza Horizon 5	40−45 −145%	100−110 +145%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −79.6%	200−210 +79.6%
Valorant	65−70 −149%	160−170 +149%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −36.8%	24−27 +36.8%
Dota 2	24−27 −188%	69 +188%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 −150%	60−65 +150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 −130%	350−400 +130%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −186%	40−45 +186%
World of Tanks	110−120 −131%	250−260 +131%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −131%	70−75 +131%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −225%	130−140 +225%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 −150%	100−105 +150%
Forza Horizon 5	24−27 −168%	65−70 +168%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −149%	85−90 +149%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −150%	55−60 +150%
Valorant	40−45 −220%	120−130 +220%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −157%	18−20 +157%
Dota 2	27−30 −179%	78 +179%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 −141%	65−70 +141%
Metro Exodus	10−12 −318%	46 +318%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 −179%	130−140 +179%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −160%	24−27 +160%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −141%	65−70 +141%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 −213%	45−50 +213%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −100%	14 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Dota 2	27−30 −150%	70−75 +150%
Far Cry 5	20−22 −200%	60−65 +200%
Fortnite	18−20 −222%	55−60 +222%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −139%	55−60 +139%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 −217%	35−40 +217%
Valorant	18−20 −278%	65−70 +278%

This is how M4000M and Arc B580 compete in popular games:

Arc B580 is 67% faster in 1080p
Arc B580 is 159% faster in 1440p
Arc B580 is 110% faster in 4K

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the M4000M is 22% faster.
in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the Arc B580 is 430% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

M4000M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
Arc B580 is ahead in 44 tests (98%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	15.35	38.77
Recency	18 August 2015	16 January 2025
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	12 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	190 Watt

M4000M has 90% lower power consumption.

Arc B580, on the other hand, has a 152.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc B580 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M4000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M4000M is a mobile workstation card while Arc B580 is a desktop one.