FirePro W6150M vs Quadro M4000M

Place in performance ranking	313	551
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.45	1.32
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2018)	GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code name	GM204	Saturn
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	2 October 2015 (8 years ago)	12 November 2015 (8 years ago)
Current price	$832	$299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

M4000M has 161% better value for money than W6150M.

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	1,280	768
Core clock speed	975 MHz	1075 MHz
Boost clock speed	1013 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	5,200 million	2,080 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	78.00	51.60
Floating-point performance	2,496 gflops	1,651 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro M4000M and FirePro W6150M 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	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	5012 MHz	5500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160 GB/s	88 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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 (12_0)
Shader Model	5.0	6.3
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	+	1.2.131
CUDA	5.2	no data

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.

M4000M 16.00
+162%

W6150M 6.10

Quadro M4000M outperforms FirePro W6150M by 162% 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%

M4000M 6185
+162%

W6150M 2358

Quadro M4000M outperforms FirePro W6150M by 162% in Passmark.

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	60 +186%	21−24 −186%
4K	20 +186%	7−8 −186%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

24−27

+178%

9−10
−178%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27−30 +170%	10−11 −170%
Battlefield 5	50−55 +189%	18−20 −189%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +192%	12−14 −192%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +178%	9−10 −178%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +169%	16−18 −169%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 +181%	16−18 −181%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +194%	18−20 −194%
Hitman 3	35−40 +164%	14−16 −164%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +189%	18−20 −189%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +167%	18−20 −167%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +175%	16−18 −175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +181%	16−18 −181%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +190%	10−11 −190%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27−30 +170%	10−11 −170%
Battlefield 5	50−55 +189%	18−20 −189%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +192%	12−14 −192%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +178%	9−10 −178%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +169%	16−18 −169%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 +181%	16−18 −181%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +194%	18−20 −194%
Hitman 3	35−40 +164%	14−16 −164%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +189%	18−20 −189%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +167%	18−20 −167%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +175%	16−18 −175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +181%	16−18 −181%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +183%	12−14 −183%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +190%	10−11 −190%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27−30 +170%	10−11 −170%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +192%	12−14 −192%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +178%	9−10 −178%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +169%	16−18 −169%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +194%	18−20 −194%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +189%	18−20 −189%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +167%	18−20 −167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +183%	12−14 −183%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +190%	10−11 −190%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

40−45
+175%

16−18

−175%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +210%	10−11 −210%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−33 +200%	10−11 −200%
Hitman 3	21−24 +188%	8−9 −188%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +186%	7−8 −186%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +189%	9−10 −189%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +210%	10−11 −210%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +167%	12−14 −167%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +190%	10−11 −190%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 +200%	10−11 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5	30−35 +183%	12−14 −183%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Hitman 3	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Battlefield 5	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +163%	8−9 −163%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%