T1000 vs Tesla T4

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tesla T4 and T1000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Tesla T4
2018
16 GB GDDR6, 70 Watt
27.79
+39.9%

Tesla T4 outperforms T1000 by a considerable 40% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking212291
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency27.2327.24
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameTU104TU117
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date13 September 2018 (6 years ago)6 May 2021 (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 cores2560896
Core clock speed585 MHz1065 MHz
Boost clock speed1590 MHz1395 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)70 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate254.478.12
Floating-point processing power8.141 TFLOPS2.5 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs16056
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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount16 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth320.0 GB/s160.0 GB/s

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 outputs4x mini-DisplayPort

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2
CUDA7.57.5
DLSS+-

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.

Tesla T4 27.79
+39.9%
T1000 19.87

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.

Tesla T4 10683
+39.9%
T1000 7636

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Tesla T4 61276
+62.5%
T1000 37701

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Tesla T4 70627
+86.8%
T1000 37817

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 HD85−90
+39.3%
61
−39.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45
+0%
45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 34
+0%
34
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 62
+0%
62
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 57
+0%
57
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 77
+0%
77
+0%
Metro Exodus 35
+0%
35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 64
+0%
64
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24
+0%
24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 53
+0%
53
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35
+0%
35
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how Tesla T4 and T1000 compete in popular games:

  • Tesla T4 is 39% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 27.79 19.87
Recency 13 September 2018 6 May 2021
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 70 Watt 50 Watt

Tesla T4 has a 39.9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

T1000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and 40% lower power consumption.

The Tesla T4 is our recommended choice as it beats the T1000 in performance tests.

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 Tesla T4
Tesla T4
NVIDIA T1000
T1000

Other comparisons

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.


3.1 239 votes

Rate Tesla T4 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 64 votes

Rate T1000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Tesla T4 or T1000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.