GeForce4 460 Go vs Quadro M3000M

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking354not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.81no data
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Celsius (1999−2005)
GPU code nameGM204NV17 A5
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date18 August 2015 (9 years ago)14 October 2002 (22 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 cores1,0242
Core clock speed1050 MHz250 MHz
Boost clock speedno data250 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million29 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Wattno data
Texture fill rate67.201.000
Floating-point processing power2.15 TFLOPSno data
ROPs322
TMUs644

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
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16AGP 4x
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount4 GB64 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz250 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s8 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX128.0
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.51.3
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA5.2-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

M3000M 5596
+111820%
GeForce4 460 Go 5

Pros & cons summary


Recency 18 August 2015 14 October 2002
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 64 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 150 nm

M3000M has an age advantage of 12 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 435.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Quadro M3000M and GeForce4 460 Go. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro M3000M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce4 460 Go 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 M3000M
Quadro M3000M
NVIDIA GeForce4 460 Go
GeForce4 460 Go

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.


3.8 346 votes

Rate Quadro M3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate GeForce4 460 Go 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.