Radeon Vega 7 vs Quadro M4000

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M4000 with Radeon Vega 7, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M4000
2015
8 GB GDDR5, 120 Watt
14.96
+132%

M4000 outperforms Vega 7 by a whopping 132% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking332548
Place by popularitynot in top-10010
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.89no data
Power efficiency9.9111.38
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGM204Cezanne
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date29 June 2015 (9 years ago)13 April 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$791 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores1664448
Core clock speed773 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1900 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate80.3953.20
Floating-point processing power2.573 TFLOPS1.702 TFLOPS
ROPs648
TMUs10428

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 x16IGP
Length241 mmno data
Width1" (2.5 cm)no data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinNone
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount8 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1502 MHzSystem Shared
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 outputs
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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.1.1261.2
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 HD50−55
+117%
23
−117%
1440p65−70
+132%
28
−132%
4K40−45
+122%
18
−122%

Cost per frame, $

1080p15.82no data
1440p12.17no data
4K19.78no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Battlefield 5 28
+0%
28
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+0%
14
+0%
Far Cry 5 20
+0%
20
+0%
Fortnite 63
+0%
63
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 37
+0%
37
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Battlefield 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 58
+0%
58
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Far Cry 5 18
+0%
18
+0%
Fortnite 27
+0%
27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35
+0%
35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
+0%
17
+0%
Metro Exodus 13
+0%
13
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 23
+0%
23
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%
Valorant 73
+0%
73
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+0%
9
+0%
Far Cry 5 18
+0%
18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27
+0%
27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+0%
13
+0%
Valorant 25
+0%
25
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14
+0%
14
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 48
+0%
48
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 25
+0%
25
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how Quadro M4000 and Vega 7 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M4000 is 117% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M4000 is 132% faster in 1440p
  • Quadro M4000 is 122% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.96 6.44
Recency 29 June 2015 13 April 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 45 Watt

Quadro M4000 has a 132.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Vega 7, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 166.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Vega 7 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M4000 is a workstation card while Radeon Vega 7 is a notebook 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 M4000
Quadro M4000
AMD Radeon Vega 7
Radeon Vega 7

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.


3.6 249 votes

Rate Quadro M4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 2468 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 7 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M4000 or Radeon Vega 7, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.