GeForce GT 750M vs Quadro P4000

Place in the ranking	183	720
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	17.40	no data
Power efficiency	19.87	4.76
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	GP104	GK107
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	6 February 2017 (7 years ago)	9 January 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$815	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 cores	1792	384
Core clock speed	1202 MHz	941 MHz
Boost clock speed	1480 MHz	967 MHz
Number of transistors	7,200 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	165.8	30.94
Floating-point processing power	5.304 TFLOPS	0.7427 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	16
TMUs	112	32

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 size	no data	medium sized
Bus support	no data	PCI Express 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	241 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no 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 type	GDDR5	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Standard memory configuration	no data	DDR3/GDDR5
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1901 MHz	1003 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192 GB/s	64.19 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 Connectors	4x DisplayPort	No outputs
eDP 1.2 signal support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
LVDS signal support	no data	Up to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display support	no data	Up to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
HDMI	-	+
HDCP content protection	-	+
Display Port	1.4	no data
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	-	+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	-	+

Supported technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Support	-	+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	-	+
Optimus	+	+
3D Vision / 3DTV Play	-	+
3D Stereo	+	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.

DirectX	12	12 API
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.5	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	+	1.1.126
CUDA	6.1	+

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 P4000 30.13
+776%

GT 750M 3.44

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 P4000 11625
+775%

GT 750M 1329

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro P4000 41600
+877%

GT 750M 4258

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Quadro P4000 42209
+990%

GT 750M 3874

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Quadro P4000 38590
+1138%

GT 750M 3118

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Quadro P4000 102
+750%

GT 750M 12

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 HD

66
+247%

−247%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

12.35

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

50−55
+750%

6−7

−750%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	65−70 +550%	10−11 −550%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50−55 +2500%	2−3 −2500%
Battlefield 5	95−100 +1300%	7−8 −1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	60−65 +675%	8−9 −675%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +750%	6−7 −750%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +871%	7−8 −871%
Far Cry New Dawn	75−80 +756%	9−10 −756%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +768%	18−20 −768%
Hitman 3	60−65 +688%	8−9 −688%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130−140 +432%	24−27 −432%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +1940%	5−6 −1940%
Red Dead Redemption 2	75−80 +744%	9−10 −744%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	100−110 +650%	14−16 −650%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +178%	40−45 −178%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	65−70 +550%	10−11 −550%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50−55 +2500%	2−3 −2500%
Battlefield 5	95−100 +1300%	7−8 −1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	60−65 +675%	8−9 −675%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +750%	6−7 −750%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +871%	7−8 −871%
Far Cry New Dawn	75−80 +756%	9−10 −756%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +768%	18−20 −768%
Hitman 3	60−65 +688%	8−9 −688%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130−140 +432%	24−27 −432%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +1940%	5−6 −1940%
Red Dead Redemption 2	75−80 +744%	9−10 −744%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	100−110 +650%	14−16 −650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60−65 +113%	30 −113%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +178%	40−45 −178%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	65−70 +550%	10−11 −550%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50−55 +2500%	2−3 −2500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	60−65 +675%	8−9 −675%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +750%	6−7 −750%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +871%	7−8 −871%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +768%	18−20 −768%
Hitman 3	60−65 +688%	8−9 −688%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130−140 +432%	24−27 −432%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	100−110 +650%	14−16 −650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	41 +720%	5 −720%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +178%	40−45 −178%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

75−80
+744%

9−10

−744%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 +850%	6−7 −850%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 +820%	5−6 −820%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +967%	3−4 −967%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +933%	3−4 −933%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +1067%	3−4 −1067%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +950%	2−3 −950%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +775%	4−5 −775%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +17300%	1−2 −17300%
Hitman 3	35−40 +363%	8−9 −363%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 +688%	8−9 −688%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +850%	6−7 −850%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	65−70 +886%	7−8 −886%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +1900%	2−3 −1900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	160−170 +671%	21−24 −671%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

50−55
+629%

7−8

−629%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +1400%	2−3 −1400%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 +1100%	2−3 −1100%
Hitman 3	24−27 +1100%	2−3 −1100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	150−160 +844%	16−18 −844%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +800%	4−5 −800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +1033%	3−4 −1033%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 +1600%	1−2 −1600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9	0−1
Far Cry 5	16−18 +750%	2−3 −750%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +4000%	1−2 −4000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +875%	4−5 −875%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

24−27
+550%

4−5

−550%

This is how Quadro P4000 and GT 750M compete in popular games:

Quadro P4000 is 247% faster in 1080p

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P4000 is 17300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, Quadro P4000 surpassed GT 750M in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	30.13	3.44
Recency	6 February 2017	9 January 2013
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	50 Watt

Quadro P4000 has a 775.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

GT 750M, on the other hand, has 100% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 750M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P4000 is a workstation card while GeForce GT 750M is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.