Radeon RX 6500M vs Quadro M4000M

Place in the ranking	339	274
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	11.02	27.94
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GM204	Navi 24
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	18 August 2015 (9 years ago)	4 January 2022 (3 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	1024
Core clock speed	975 MHz	2000 MHz
Boost clock speed	1013 MHz	2400 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	78.00	153.6
Floating-point processing power	2.496 TFLOPS	4.915 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	32
TMUs	80	64
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	16

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	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160 GB/s	144.0 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	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	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.6
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.2
Vulkan	+	1.3
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 15.97

RX 6500M 20.25
+26.8%

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 6142

RX 6500M 7786
+26.8%

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

RX 6500M 17889
+74.4%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

M4000M 7723

RX 6500M 14018
+81.5%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

M4000M 49204

RX 6500M 88601
+80.1%

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 +21%	62 −21%
4K	20 −20%	24−27 +20%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −60.7%	45 +60.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −113%	66 +113%
Elden Ring	45−50 −32.7%	65 +32.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −23.1%	60−65 +23.1%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −39.3%	39 +39.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −6.5%	33 +6.5%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −75.4%	114 +75.4%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −22.7%	50−55 +22.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −21.1%	45−50 +21.1%
Valorant	60−65 −57.8%	101 +57.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −23.1%	60−65 +23.1%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +0%	28 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +93.8%	16 −93.8%
Dota 2	55−60 −40.4%	80 +40.4%
Elden Ring	45−50 −12.2%	55 +12.2%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +62.9%	35 −62.9%
Fortnite	85−90 −21.6%	100−110 +21.6%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −46.2%	95 +46.2%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 −21.1%	69 +21.1%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +132%	19 −132%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −20.4%	130−140 +20.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −21.1%	45−50 +21.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 −30.6%	60−65 +30.6%
Valorant	60−65 +12.3%	57 −12.3%
World of Tanks	200−210 −15.3%	230−240 +15.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −23.1%	60−65 +23.1%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −28.6%	35−40 +28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +107%	15 −107%
Dota 2	55−60 −66.7%	95 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −17.5%	65−70 +17.5%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −27.7%	83 +27.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −20.4%	130−140 +20.4%
Valorant	60−65 −28.1%	80−85 +28.1%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	24−27 −33.3%	30−35 +33.3%
Elden Ring	24−27 −36%	30−35 +36%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 −33.3%	30−35 +33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 −16.2%	170−180 +16.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −28.6%	18−20 +28.6%
World of Tanks	110−120 −23.4%	130−140 +23.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −28.1%	40−45 +28.1%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −37.5%	55−60 +37.5%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −33.3%	50−55 +33.3%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −31.4%	45−50 +31.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −33.3%	27−30 +33.3%
Valorant	40−45 −30%	50−55 +30%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −41.7%	16−18 +41.7%
Dota 2	27−30 −21.4%	30−35 +21.4%
Elden Ring	10−12 −36.4%	14−16 +36.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 −25.9%	30−35 +25.9%
Metro Exodus	10−12 −36.4%	14−16 +36.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 −29.8%	60−65 +29.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −30%	12−14 +30%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −25.9%	30−35 +25.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 −33.3%	20−22 +33.3%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −41.7%	16−18 +41.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Dota 2	27−30 −21.4%	30−35 +21.4%
Far Cry 5	20−22 −30%	24−27 +30%
Fortnite	18−20 −33.3%	24−27 +33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −30.4%	30−33 +30.4%
Valorant	18−20 −33.3%	24−27 +33.3%

This is how M4000M and RX 6500M compete in popular games:

M4000M is 21% faster in 1080p
RX 6500M is 20% 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 132% faster.
in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RX 6500M is 113% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

M4000M is ahead in 5 tests (8%)
RX 6500M is ahead in 57 tests (90%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	15.97	20.25
Recency	18 August 2015	4 January 2022
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	50 Watt

RX 6500M has a 26.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6500M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M4000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M4000M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 6500M 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.