GeForce Go 7400 vs Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile with GeForce Go 7400, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4000 Mobile
2019
8 GB GDDR6, 110 Watt
34.16
+19994%

RTX 4000 Mobile outperforms Go 7400 by a whopping 19994% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1531412
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.31no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameTU104G72
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date27 May 2019 (5 years ago)1 February 2006 (18 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 cores25607
Core clock speed1110 MHz450 MHz
Boost clock speed1560 MHz450 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 million112 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Wattno data
Texture fill rate249.61.800
Floating-point processing power7.987 TFLOPSno data
ROPs642
TMUs1604
Tensor Cores320no data
Ray Tracing Cores40no 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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16

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 typeGDDR6GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount8 GB128 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz450 MHz
Memory bandwidth448.0 GB/s7.2 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model6.53.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA7.5-

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 HD1110−1
1440p63-0−1
4K48-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+2650%
2−3
−2650%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 87
+2800%
3−4
−2800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60 0−1
Battlefield 5 100−110 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+3200%
2−3
−3200%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+2650%
2−3
−2650%
Far Cry 5 70−75 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 125 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 170−180 0−1
Hitman 3 65−70
+1600%
4−5
−1600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+1663%
8−9
−1663%
Metro Exodus 100−110 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 180
+4400%
4−5
−4400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+321%
27−30
−321%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
+2200%
3−4
−2200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60 0−1
Battlefield 5 100−110 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+3200%
2−3
−3200%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+2650%
2−3
−2650%
Far Cry 5 70−75 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 90 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 170−180 0−1
Hitman 3 65−70
+1600%
4−5
−1600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+1663%
8−9
−1663%
Metro Exodus 100−110 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+2750%
4−5
−2750%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+656%
9−10
−656%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+321%
27−30
−321%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 54
+1700%
3−4
−1700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+3200%
2−3
−3200%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+2650%
2−3
−2650%
Far Cry 5 70−75 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 170−180 0−1
Hitman 3 65−70
+1600%
4−5
−1600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 121
+1413%
8−9
−1413%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+2750%
4−5
−2750%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75
+733%
9−10
−733%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+321%
27−30
−321%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 60 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 41 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Far Cry 5 35−40 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 180−190 0−1
Hitman 3 40−45
+567%
6−7
−567%
Horizon Zero Dawn 89
+4350%
2−3
−4350%
Metro Exodus 77 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 170−180 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+2650%
2−3
−2650%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 33 0−1
Hitman 3 24−27 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160 0−1
Metro Exodus 35−40 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 28
+2700%
1−2
−2700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 0−1
Far Cry 5 18−20 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 40−45 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+1300%
2−3
−1300%

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

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RTX 4000 Mobile is 4400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, RTX 4000 Mobile surpassed Go 7400 in all 29 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 34.16 0.17
Recency 27 May 2019 1 February 2006
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 12 nm 90 nm

RTX 4000 Mobile has a 19994.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 650% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce Go 7400 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while GeForce Go 7400 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 RTX 4000 Mobile
Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile
NVIDIA GeForce Go 7400
GeForce Go 7400

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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 30 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate GeForce Go 7400 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.