UHD Graphics vs Quadro K4000M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K4000M with UHD Graphics, including specs and performance data.

K4000M
2012
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
4.38

UHD Graphics outperforms K4000M by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking642621
Place by popularitynot in top-1005
Power efficiency3.4738.11
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 11.0 (2019−2021)
GPU code nameGK104Jasper Lake GT1
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date1 June 2012 (12 years ago)11 January 2021 (4 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 cores960256
Core clock speed601 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data750 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm+
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate48.0812.00
Floating-point processing power1.154 TFLOPS0.384 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs8016

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)Ring Bus

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed700 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth89.6 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.2
CUDA+-

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.

K4000M 4.38
UHD Graphics 4.81
+9.8%

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.

K4000M 1957
UHD Graphics 2151
+9.9%

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 HD47
−6.4%
50−55
+6.4%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Fortnite 27−30
−7.1%
30−33
+7.1%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−9.1%
24−27
+9.1%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Valorant 60−65
−8.3%
65−70
+8.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 80−85
−9.8%
90−95
+9.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
−9.8%
45−50
+9.8%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Fortnite 27−30
−7.1%
30−33
+7.1%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−9.1%
24−27
+9.1%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Valorant 60−65
−8.3%
65−70
+8.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
−9.8%
45−50
+9.8%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−9.1%
24−27
+9.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Valorant 60−65
−8.3%
65−70
+8.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 27−30
−7.1%
30−33
+7.1%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+2.9%
35−40
−2.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−2.9%
35−40
+2.9%
Valorant 50−55
−5.8%
55−60
+5.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how K4000M and UHD Graphics compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics is 6% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.38 4.81
Recency 1 June 2012 11 January 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 10 Watt

UHD Graphics has a 9.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 900% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro K4000M and UHD Graphics.

Be aware that Quadro K4000M is a mobile workstation card while UHD Graphics is a mobile workstation one.

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 K4000M
Quadro K4000M
Intel UHD Graphics
UHD Graphics

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.


3.4 14 votes

Rate Quadro K4000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 7378 votes

Rate UHD Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K4000M or UHD Graphics, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.