Quadro 4000 vs GeForce GTS 250

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTS 250 with Quadro 4000, including specs and performance data.

GTS 250
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 150 Watt
1.54

4000 outperforms GTS 250 by a whopping 149% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking972706
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.090.18
Power efficiency0.701.85
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameG92BGF100
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date4 March 2009 (15 years ago)2 November 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $1,199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro 4000 has 100% better value for money than GTS 250.

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 cores128256
Core clock speed738 MHz475 MHz
Number of transistors754 million3,100 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt142 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate44.9315.20
Floating-point processing power0.3871 TFLOPS0.4864 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs6432

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 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length229 mm241 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1x 6-pin
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1100 MHz702 MHz
Memory bandwidth70.4 GB/s89.86 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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVI1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.04.6
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+2.0

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.

GTS 250 1.54
Quadro 4000 3.83
+149%

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.

GTS 250 594
Quadro 4000 1477
+149%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.54 3.83
Recency 4 March 2009 2 November 2010
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 142 Watt

Quadro 4000 has a 148.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 37.5% more advanced lithography process, and 5.6% lower power consumption.

The Quadro 4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 250 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTS 250 is a desktop card while Quadro 4000 is a 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 GeForce GTS 250
GeForce GTS 250
NVIDIA Quadro 4000
Quadro 4000

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.


3.5 1667 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 188 votes

Rate Quadro 4000 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.