Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Quadro M4000 vs Radeon Pro W5500
Aggregated performance score
Pro W5500
2020
8 GB GDDR6
23.61
+36.7%
Quadro M4000
2015
8GB GDDR5
17.27
Radeon Pro W5500 outperforms Quadro M4000 by 37% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 215 | 291 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Value for money | 46.08 | 10.40 |
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) | Maxwell 2.0 (2015−2019) |
| GPU code name | Navi 14 | GM204 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 10 February 2020 (4 years old) | 29 June 2015 (8 years old) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $399 | $791 |
| Current price | $308 (0.8x MSRP) | $314 (0.4x MSRP) |
Value for money
Pro W5500 has 343% better value for money than Quadro M4000.
Technical specs
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1408 | 1664 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 773 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1400 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 6,400 million | 5,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 120 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 123.2 | 80.39 |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 2,573 gflops |
Size and 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).
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 241 mm |
| Width | 1-slot | 1" (2.5 cm) |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1 x 6-pin |
| SLI options | no data | + |
Memory
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 | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 14000 MHz | 6008 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | Up to 192 GB/s |
Video outputs and ports
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 | DP DP DP DP 3-pin Stereo |
| Number of simultaneous displays | no data | 4 |
| Multi-display synchronization | no data | Quadro Sync |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| 3D Vision Pro | no data | + |
| Mosaic | no data | + |
| High-Performance Video I/O6 | no data | + |
| nView Desktop Management | no data | + |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 5 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | + |
| CUDA | no data | 5.2 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance 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.
Radeon Pro W5500 outperforms Quadro M4000 by 37% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
Radeon Pro W5500 outperforms Quadro M4000 by 37% in Passmark.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 23.61 | 17.27 |
| Recency | 10 February 2020 | 29 June 2015 |
| Cost | $399 | $791 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 120 Watt |
The Radeon Pro W5500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M4000 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
