Quadro T500 Mobile vs Quadro 4000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 4000 with Quadro T500 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 4000
2010
2 GB GDDR5, 142 Watt
3.83

T500 Mobile outperforms 4000 by a whopping 138% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking699474
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.16no data
Power efficiency1.8735.05
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGF100TU117
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date2 November 2010 (14 years ago)2 December 2020 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores256896
Core clock speed475 MHz1365 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1695 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)142 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate15.2094.92
Floating-point processing power0.4864 TFLOPS3.037 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs3256

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed702 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth89.86 GB/s80 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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA2.07.5

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 HD14−16
−157%
36
+157%
1440p6−7
−150%
15
+150%
4K7−8
−143%
17
+143%

Cost per frame, $

1080p85.64no data
1440p199.83no data
4K171.29no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 28
+0%
28
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 27
+0%
27
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how Quadro 4000 and T500 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T500 Mobile is 157% faster in 1080p
  • T500 Mobile is 150% faster in 1440p
  • T500 Mobile is 143% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 68 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.83 9.11
Recency 2 November 2010 2 December 2020
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 142 Watt 18 Watt

T500 Mobile has a 137.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 688.9% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T500 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 4000 is a workstation card while Quadro T500 Mobile 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 4000
Quadro 4000
NVIDIA Quadro T500 Mobile
Quadro T500 Mobile

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.


3.6 181 vote

Rate Quadro 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 102 votes

Rate Quadro T500 Mobile 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.