Radeon HD 6950M vs Quadro M4000M

Place in the ranking	341	724
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	11.03	4.94
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code name	GM204	Blackcomb
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	18 August 2015 (9 years ago)	4 January 2011 (14 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 cores	1,280	960
Core clock speed	975 MHz	580 MHz
Boost clock speed	1013 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	5,200 million	1,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	78.00	27.84
Floating-point processing power	2.496 TFLOPS	1.114 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	32
TMUs	80	48

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	large
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectors	None	no 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160 GB/s	115.2 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	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	+	-
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.

DirectX	12	11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.0
OpenGL	4.5	4.4
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	+	N/A
CUDA	5.2	-

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 15.99
+347%

HD 6950M 3.58

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
+318%

HD 6950M 2452

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 +369%	16−18 −369%
4K	20 +400%	4−5 −400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +200%	9−10 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +300%	8−9 −300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +420%	10−11 −420%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +200%	9−10 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +300%	8−9 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +313%	16−18 −313%
Forza Horizon 5	40−45 +740%	5−6 −740%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +529%	7−8 −529%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 +225%	12−14 −225%
Valorant	65−70 +829%	7−8 −829%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +420%	10−11 −420%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +200%	9−10 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +300%	8−9 −300%
Dota 2	55−60 +418%	10−12 −418%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +205%	18−20 −205%
Fortnite	85−90 +340%	20−22 −340%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +313%	16−18 −313%
Forza Horizon 5	40−45 +740%	5−6 −740%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 +418%	10−12 −418%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +529%	7−8 −529%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +253%	30−35 −253%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 +225%	12−14 −225%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +277%	12−14 −277%
Valorant	65−70 +829%	7−8 −829%
World of Tanks	200−210 +226%	60−65 −226%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +420%	10−11 −420%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +200%	9−10 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +300%	8−9 −300%
Dota 2	55−60 +418%	10−12 −418%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +205%	18−20 −205%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +313%	16−18 −313%
Forza Horizon 5	40−45 +740%	5−6 −740%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +253%	30−35 −253%
Valorant	65−70 +829%	7−8 −829%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	24−27 +1100%	2−3 −1100%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 +700%	3−4 −700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 +492%	24−27 −492%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
World of Tanks	110−120 +344%	24−27 −344%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +700%	4−5 −700%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +400%	8−9 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +900%	4−5 −900%
Forza Horizon 5	24−27 +525%	4−5 −525%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +400%	7−8 −400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +267%	6−7 −267%
Valorant	40−45 +264%	10−12 −264%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Dota 2	27−30 +75%	16−18 −75%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 +68.8%	16−18 −68.8%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +370%	10−11 −370%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +68.8%	16−18 −68.8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +400%	3−4 −400%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Dota 2	27−30 +75%	16−18 −75%
Far Cry 5	20−22 +400%	4−5 −400%
Fortnite	18−20 +800%	2−3 −800%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +1050%	2−3 −1050%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Valorant	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%

This is how M4000M and HD 6950M compete in popular games:

M4000M is 369% faster in 1080p
M4000M is 400% faster in 4K

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

in Dota 2, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the M4000M is 1100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

M4000M is ahead in 59 tests (98%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	15.99	3.58
Recency	18 August 2015	4 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	50 Watt

M4000M has a 346.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

HD 6950M, on the other hand, has 100% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M4000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6950M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M4000M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon HD 6950M 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.