GeForce GTX 260M SLI vs Quadro M4000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M4000M with GeForce GTX 260M SLI, including specs and performance data.

M4000M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
15.95
+383%

M4000M outperforms GTX 260M SLI by a whopping 383% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking347751
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.961.51
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)G9x (2007−2010)
GPU code nameGM204NB9E-GTX
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date18 August 2015 (9 years ago)2 March 2009 (15 years ago)

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 cores1,280224
Core clock speed975 MHz550 MHz
Boost clock speed1013 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,200 million1508 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate78.00no data
Floating-point processing power2.496 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs80no data

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 sizelargelarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz950 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data
Display Port1.2no 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.

DirectX1210
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA5.2+

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 HD63
+425%
12−14
−425%
4K20
+400%
4−5
−400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+388%
8−9
−388%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+200%
9−10
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+417%
6−7
−417%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+388%
8−9
−388%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+482%
10−12
−482%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+200%
9−10
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+417%
6−7
−417%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+629%
7−8
−629%
Fortnite 80−85
+394%
16−18
−394%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+320%
14−16
−320%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+720%
5−6
−720%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+293%
14−16
−293%
Valorant 120−130
+154%
45−50
−154%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+388%
8−9
−388%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+482%
10−12
−482%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+200%
9−10
−200%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
+243%
55−60
−243%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+417%
6−7
−417%
Dota 2 90−95
+213%
30−33
−213%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+629%
7−8
−629%
Fortnite 80−85
+394%
16−18
−394%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+320%
14−16
−320%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+720%
5−6
−720%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+533%
9−10
−533%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+520%
5−6
−520%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+293%
14−16
−293%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+356%
9−10
−356%
Valorant 120−130
+154%
45−50
−154%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+482%
10−12
−482%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+200%
9−10
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+417%
6−7
−417%
Dota 2 90−95
+213%
30−33
−213%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+629%
7−8
−629%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+320%
14−16
−320%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+720%
5−6
−720%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+293%
14−16
−293%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+356%
9−10
−356%
Valorant 120−130
+154%
45−50
−154%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 80−85
+394%
16−18
−394%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+383%
21−24
−383%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+1100%
2−3
−1100%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+543%
21−24
−543%
Valorant 150−160
+394%
30−35
−394%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+425%
8−9
−425%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+560%
5−6
−560%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+429%
7−8
−429%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+575%
4−5
−575%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+380%
5−6
−380%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+450%
6−7
−450%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+68.8%
16−18
−68.8%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+425%
4−5
−425%
Valorant 80−85
+413%
16−18
−413%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Dota 2 50−55
+489%
9−10
−489%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+767%
3−4
−767%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%

This is how M4000M and GTX 260M SLI compete in popular games:

  • M4000M is 425% faster in 1080p
  • M4000M is 400% faster in 4K

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the M4000M is 1800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, M4000M surpassed GTX 260M SLI in all 61 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.95 3.30
Recency 18 August 2015 2 March 2009
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 150 Watt

M4000M has a 383.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M4000M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M4000M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 260M SLI is a mobile workstation one.

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 M4000M
Quadro M4000M
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260M SLI
GeForce GTX 260M SLI

Other comparisons

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.


4.1 145 votes

Rate Quadro M4000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 7 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 260M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M4000M or GeForce GTX 260M SLI, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.