Quadro FX 4000 vs FirePro S9300 X2

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated1365
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data0.13
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameCapsaicinNV40
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date31 March 2016 (8 years ago)1 April 2004 (20 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,999 $2,199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores4096 ×2no data
Core clock speed850 MHz375 MHz
Number of transistors8,900 million222 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)300 Watt142 Watt
Texture fill rate217.6 ×24.500
Floating-point processing power6.963 TFLOPS ×2no data
ROPs64 ×28
TMUs256 ×212

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 x16AGP 8x
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pin2x Molex

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 typeHBMGDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB ×2256 MB
Memory bus width4096 Bit ×2256 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz500 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/s ×232 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 outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model6.03.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 31 March 2016 1 April 2004
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 300 Watt 142 Watt

S9300 X2 has an age advantage of 11 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

FX 4000, on the other hand, has 111.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FirePro S9300 X2 and Quadro FX 4000. We've got no test results to judge.

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.


AMD FirePro S9300 X2
FirePro S9300 X2
NVIDIA Quadro FX 4000
Quadro FX 4000

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.


3.2 6 votes

Rate FirePro S9300 X2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 21 vote

Rate Quadro FX 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro S9300 X2 or Quadro FX 4000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.