GeForce GTX 680M SLI vs Quadro M4000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M4000M with GeForce GTX 680M SLI, including specs and performance data.

M4000M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
15.97

GTX 680M SLI outperforms M4000M by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking339330
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency11.02no data
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGM204N13E-GTX
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date18 August 2015 (9 years ago)4 June 2012 (12 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 cores1,2802688
Core clock speed975 MHz720 MHz
Boost clock speed1013 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Wattno data
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
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2x 4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit2x 256 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz3600 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 compatibility

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

DirectX1211
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
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.

M4000M 15.97
GTX 680M SLI 16.53
+3.5%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

M4000M 10259
GTX 680M SLI 10952
+6.8%

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:

900p120−130
−10.8%
133
+10.8%
Full HD75
−28%
96
+28%
4K20
+11.1%
18−21
−11.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
−3.6%
27−30
+3.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
−6.5%
30−35
+6.5%
Elden Ring 45−50
−4.1%
50−55
+4.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
−1.9%
50−55
+1.9%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
−3.6%
27−30
+3.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
−6.5%
30−35
+6.5%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−4.6%
65−70
+4.6%
Metro Exodus 40−45
−2.3%
45−50
+2.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
−5.3%
40−45
+5.3%
Valorant 60−65
−3.1%
65−70
+3.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
−1.9%
50−55
+1.9%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
−3.6%
27−30
+3.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
−6.5%
30−35
+6.5%
Dota 2 55−60
−3.5%
55−60
+3.5%
Elden Ring 45−50
−4.1%
50−55
+4.1%
Far Cry 5 55−60
−3.5%
55−60
+3.5%
Fortnite 85−90
−3.4%
90−95
+3.4%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−4.6%
65−70
+4.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
−3.5%
55−60
+3.5%
Metro Exodus 40−45
−2.3%
45−50
+2.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
−2.7%
110−120
+2.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
−5.3%
40−45
+5.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
−4.1%
50−55
+4.1%
Valorant 60−65
−3.1%
65−70
+3.1%
World of Tanks 200−210
−13.4%
229
+13.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
−1.9%
50−55
+1.9%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
−3.6%
27−30
+3.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
−6.5%
30−35
+6.5%
Dota 2 55−60
−3.5%
55−60
+3.5%
Far Cry 5 55−60
−3.5%
55−60
+3.5%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−4.6%
65−70
+4.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
−2.7%
110−120
+2.7%
Valorant 60−65
−3.1%
65−70
+3.1%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 24−27
−4.2%
24−27
+4.2%
Elden Ring 24−27
−4%
24−27
+4%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
−4.2%
24−27
+4.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
−3.4%
150−160
+3.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
World of Tanks 110−120
−3.6%
110−120
+3.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
−6.3%
30−35
+6.3%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
−5%
40−45
+5%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−5.1%
40−45
+5.1%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−5.7%
35−40
+5.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 40−45
−5%
40−45
+5%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Elden Ring 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
−3.7%
27−30
+3.7%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
−4.3%
45−50
+4.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−3.7%
27−30
+3.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Fortnite 18−20
−5.6%
18−20
+5.6%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−4.3%
24−27
+4.3%
Valorant 18−20
−5.6%
18−20
+5.6%

This is how M4000M and GTX 680M SLI compete in popular games:

  • GTX 680M SLI is 11% faster in 900p
  • GTX 680M SLI is 28% faster in 1080p
  • M4000M is 11% faster in 4K

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

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 680M SLI is 25% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 680M SLI is ahead in 55 tests (87%)
  • there's a draw in 8 tests (13%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.97 16.53
Recency 18 August 2015 4 June 2012

M4000M has an age advantage of 3 years.

GTX 680M SLI, on the other hand, has a 3.5% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro M4000M and GeForce GTX 680M SLI.

Be aware that Quadro M4000M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 680M SLI is a mobile workstation 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 M4000M
Quadro M4000M
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M SLI
GeForce GTX 680M 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
4.7 3 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680M SLI 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.