Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) vs Quadro M4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M4000 with Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), including specs and performance data.

Quadro M4000
2015
8 GB GDDR5, 120 Watt
17.37
+67.3%

M4000 outperforms Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) by an impressive 67% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking319441
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.04no data
Power efficiency9.98no data
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Xe LPG (2023)
GPU code nameGM204Meteor Lake iGPU
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date29 June 2015 (9 years ago)14 December 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$791 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 cores16644
Core clock speed773 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1950 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Wattno data
Texture fill rate80.39no data
Floating-point processing power2.573 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs104no data

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 x16no data
Length241 mmno data
Width1" (2.5 cm)no data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno data
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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount8 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1502 MHzno data
Memory bandwidthUp to 192 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 Connectors4x DisplayPortno data
Number of simultaneous displays4no data
Multi-display synchronizationQuadro Syncno data

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
High-Performance Video I/O6+no data
nView Desktop Management+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212_2
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.126-
CUDA5.2-

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 HD40−45
+60%
25
−60%

Cost per frame, $

1080p19.78no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 13
+0%
13
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 11
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50
+0%
50
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 13
+0%
13
+0%
Dota 2 15
+0%
15
+0%
Far Cry 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
Fortnite 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 39
+0%
39
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
+0%
15
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
World of Tanks 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
World of Tanks 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Valorant 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

This is how Quadro M4000 and Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M4000 is 60% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.37 10.38
Recency 29 June 2015 14 December 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm

Quadro M4000 has a 67.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro M4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M4000 is a workstation card while Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is a notebook 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 M4000
Quadro M4000
Intel Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)

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.


3.6 245 votes

Rate Quadro M4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 10 votes

Rate Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 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.