Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q vs Quadro P4000

Place in the ranking	193	170
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	17.37	no data
Power efficiency	19.79	28.13
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GP104	TU104
Market segment	Workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	6 February 2017 (7 years ago)	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$815	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	1792	2560
Core clock speed	1202 MHz	780 MHz
Boost clock speed	1480 MHz	1380 MHz
Number of transistors	7,200 million	13,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	80 Watt
Texture fill rate	165.8	220.8
Floating-point processing power	5.304 TFLOPS	7.066 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	64
TMUs	112	160
Tensor Cores	no data	320
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	40

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	no data	large
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	241 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	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	8 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1901 MHz	1625 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192 GB/s	416.0 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	4x DisplayPort	No outputs
Display Port	1.4	no data
G-SYNC support	-	+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus	+	-
3D Stereo	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
VR Ready	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_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	+	1.2.131
CUDA	6.1	7.5

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.

Quadro P4000 28.81

RTX 4000 Max-Q 31.21
+8.3%

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.

Quadro P4000 11603

RTX 4000 Max-Q 12569
+8.3%

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	69 −27.5%	88 +27.5%
1440p	40−45 −15%	46 +15%
4K	50−55 −12%	56 +12%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	11.81	no data
1440p	20.38	no data
4K	16.30	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	55−60 −10.2%	65−70 +10.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	60−65 −9.7%	65−70 +9.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 −5.7%	90−95 +5.7%
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 −10.2%	65−70 +10.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	60−65 −9.7%	65−70 +9.7%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −10.1%	150−160 +10.1%
Forza Horizon 5	75−80 −7.6%	85−90 +7.6%
Metro Exodus	75−80 −6.5%	80−85 +6.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 −6.3%	65−70 +6.3%
Valorant	120−130 −8.3%	130−140 +8.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 −5.7%	90−95 +5.7%
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 −10.2%	65−70 +10.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	60−65 −9.7%	65−70 +9.7%
Dota 2	100−105 +178%	36 −178%
Far Cry 5	85−90 +28.8%	66 −28.8%
Fortnite	140−150 −5.6%	150−160 +5.6%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −10.1%	150−160 +10.1%
Forza Horizon 5	75−80 −7.6%	85−90 +7.6%
Grand Theft Auto V	100−105 −7%	100−110 +7%
Metro Exodus	75−80 −6.5%	80−85 +6.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −4.5%	180−190 +4.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 −6.3%	65−70 +6.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	100−110 −10.9%	110−120 +10.9%
Valorant	120−130 −8.3%	130−140 +8.3%
World of Tanks	270−280 −1.5%	270−280 +1.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 −5.7%	90−95 +5.7%
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 −10.2%	65−70 +10.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	60−65 −9.7%	65−70 +9.7%
Dota 2	100−105 −1%	101 +1%
Far Cry 5	85−90 −4.7%	85−90 +4.7%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −10.1%	150−160 +10.1%
Forza Horizon 5	75−80 −7.6%	85−90 +7.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −4.5%	180−190 +4.5%
Valorant	120−130 −8.3%	130−140 +8.3%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	50−55 −9.4%	55−60 +9.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	50−55 −11.3%	55−60 +11.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 −13%	150−160 +13%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 −10.7%	30−35 +10.7%
World of Tanks	190−200 −7.7%	210−220 +7.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 −6.8%	60−65 +6.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −14.8%	30−35 +14.8%
Far Cry 5	90−95 −10.8%	100−110 +10.8%
Forza Horizon 4	80−85 −9.6%	90−95 +9.6%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 −8.2%	50−55 +8.2%
Metro Exodus	65−70 −7.4%	70−75 +7.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 −10.4%	50−55 +10.4%
Valorant	85−90 −11.6%	95−100 +11.6%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −18.2%	12−14 +18.2%
Dota 2	55−60 −10.9%	60−65 +10.9%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 −10.9%	60−65 +10.9%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −8.3%	24−27 +8.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	90−95 −9.6%	100−110 +9.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −10.5%	21−24 +10.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60 −10.9%	60−65 +10.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −9.1%	35−40 +9.1%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −18.2%	12−14 +18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 −18.2%	12−14 +18.2%
Dota 2	55−60 −18.2%	65 +18.2%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −12.2%	45−50 +12.2%
Fortnite	35−40 −12.8%	40−45 +12.8%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −8.3%	50−55 +8.3%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 −7.4%	27−30 +7.4%
Valorant	40−45 −14%	45−50 +14%

This is how Quadro P4000 and RTX 4000 Max-Q compete in popular games:

RTX 4000 Max-Q is 28% faster in 1080p
RTX 4000 Max-Q is 15% faster in 1440p
RTX 4000 Max-Q is 12% faster in 4K

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

in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro P4000 is 178% faster.
in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 4000 Max-Q is 18% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Quadro P4000 is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
RTX 4000 Max-Q is ahead in 61 test (97%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	28.81	31.21
Recency	6 February 2017	27 May 2019
Chip lithography	16 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	80 Watt

RTX 4000 Max-Q has a 8.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 33.3% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro P4000 and Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q.

Be aware that Quadro P4000 is a workstation card while Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q 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.