Quadro K4100M vs Quadro M5500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M5500 and Quadro K4100M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro M5500
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
20.54
+187%

M5500 outperforms K4100M by a whopping 187% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking268547
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.51
Power efficiency9.394.90
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGM204GK104
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date8 April 2016 (8 years ago)23 July 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,499

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 cores20481152
Core clock speed1140 MHz706 MHz
Boost clock speed1165 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,200 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate149.167.78
Floating-point processing power4.772 TFLOPS1.627 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs12896

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 sizelargelarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1753 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth211 GB/s102.4 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 Port1.21.2
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

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

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan++
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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Quadro M5500 20.54
+187%
K4100M 7.15

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.

Quadro M5500 7915
+187%
K4100M 2755

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 HD130−140
+171%
48
−171%
4K35−40
+169%
13
−169%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data31.23
4Kno data115.31

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+156%
18−20
−156%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+278%
9−10
−278%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+219%
21−24
−219%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+180%
14−16
−180%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+200%
16−18
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60
+175%
20−22
−175%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+168%
45−50
−168%
Hitman 3 40−45
+186%
14−16
−186%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+133%
40−45
−133%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+255%
20−22
−255%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+175%
20−22
−175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+183%
24−27
−183%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+72.2%
50−55
−72.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+156%
18−20
−156%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+278%
9−10
−278%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+219%
21−24
−219%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+180%
14−16
−180%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+200%
16−18
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60
+175%
20−22
−175%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+168%
45−50
−168%
Hitman 3 40−45
+186%
14−16
−186%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+133%
40−45
−133%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+255%
20−22
−255%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+175%
20−22
−175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+183%
24−27
−183%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
−45.7%
67
+45.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+72.2%
50−55
−72.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+156%
18−20
−156%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+278%
9−10
−278%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+180%
14−16
−180%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+200%
16−18
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+168%
45−50
−168%
Hitman 3 40−45
+186%
14−16
−186%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+133%
40−45
−133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+183%
24−27
−183%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+109%
21−24
−109%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+72.2%
50−55
−72.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+175%
20−22
−175%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+179%
14−16
−179%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+182%
10−12
−182%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+200%
7−8
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+229%
7−8
−229%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+200%
8−9
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+360%
24−27
−360%
Hitman 3 24−27
+118%
10−12
−118%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+180%
14−16
−180%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+375%
8−9
−375%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+740%
5−6
−740%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+300%
6−7
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+167%
45−50
−167%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+183%
12−14
−183%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Hitman 3 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+361%
21−24
−361%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+425%
4−5
−425%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+250%
8−9
−250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%

This is how Quadro M5500 and K4100M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M5500 is 171% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M5500 is 169% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro M5500 is 1050% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the K4100M is 46% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro M5500 is ahead in 71 test (99%)
  • K4100M is ahead in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.54 7.15
Recency 8 April 2016 23 July 2013
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 100 Watt

Quadro M5500 has a 187.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

K4100M, on the other hand, has 50% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M5500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K4100M in performance tests.


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 M5500
Quadro M5500
NVIDIA Quadro K4100M
Quadro K4100M

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.


1.6 36 votes

Rate Quadro M5500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 91 vote

Rate Quadro K4100M 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.