GeForce GTX 680M SLI vs Quadro P4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P4000 with GeForce GTX 680M SLI, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P4000
2017
8 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
28.81
+82.6%

P4000 outperforms GTX 680M SLI by an impressive 83% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking193334
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation17.37no data
Power efficiency19.79no data
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGP104N13E-GTX
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date6 February 2017 (7 years ago)4 June 2012 (12 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 cores17922688
Core clock speed1202 MHz720 MHz
Boost clock speed1480 MHzno data
Number of transistors7,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Wattno data
Texture fill rate165.8no data
Floating-point processing power5.304 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs112no 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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2x 4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit2x 256 Bit
Memory clock speed1901 MHz3600 MHz
Memory bandwidth192 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
Display Port1.4no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus++
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.

DirectX1211
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA6.1+

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:

900p240−250
+80.5%
133
−80.5%
Full HD69
−39.1%
96
+39.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p11.81no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+111%
27−30
−111%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+87.9%
30−35
−87.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+66%
50−55
−66%
Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+111%
27−30
−111%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+87.9%
30−35
−87.9%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+103%
65−70
−103%
Forza Horizon 5 75−80
+79.5%
40−45
−79.5%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+71.1%
45−50
−71.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+57.5%
40−45
−57.5%
Valorant 120−130
+79.1%
65−70
−79.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+66%
50−55
−66%
Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+111%
27−30
−111%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+87.9%
30−35
−87.9%
Dota 2 100−105
+69.5%
55−60
−69.5%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+46.6%
55−60
−46.6%
Fortnite 140−150
+57.1%
90−95
−57.1%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+103%
65−70
−103%
Forza Horizon 5 75−80
+79.5%
40−45
−79.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 100−105
+69.5%
55−60
−69.5%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+71.1%
45−50
−71.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+51.7%
110−120
−51.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+57.5%
40−45
−57.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100−110
+98%
50−55
−98%
Valorant 120−130
+79.1%
65−70
−79.1%
World of Tanks 270−280
+19.2%
229
−19.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+66%
50−55
−66%
Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+111%
27−30
−111%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+87.9%
30−35
−87.9%
Dota 2 100−105
+69.5%
55−60
−69.5%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+46.6%
55−60
−46.6%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+103%
65−70
−103%
Forza Horizon 5 75−80
+79.5%
40−45
−79.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+51.7%
110−120
−51.7%
Valorant 120−130
+79.1%
65−70
−79.1%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 50−55
+112%
24−27
−112%
Grand Theft Auto V 50−55
+112%
24−27
−112%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+20%
110−120
−20%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+86.7%
14−16
−86.7%
World of Tanks 190−200
+71.1%
110−120
−71.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+73.5%
30−35
−73.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+108%
12−14
−108%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+121%
40−45
−121%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+102%
40−45
−102%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+88.5%
24−27
−88.5%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+83.8%
35−40
−83.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+118%
21−24
−118%
Valorant 85−90
+105%
40−45
−105%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Dota 2 55−60
+96.4%
27−30
−96.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+96.4%
27−30
−96.4%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+91.8%
45−50
−91.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+96.4%
27−30
−96.4%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+106%
16−18
−106%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Dota 2 55−60
+96.4%
27−30
−96.4%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+95.2%
21−24
−95.2%
Fortnite 35−40
+105%
18−20
−105%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+100%
24−27
−100%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+108%
12−14
−108%
Valorant 40−45
+126%
18−20
−126%

This is how Quadro P4000 and GTX 680M SLI compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P4000 is 80% faster in 900p
  • GTX 680M SLI is 39% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P4000 is 126% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Quadro P4000 surpassed GTX 680M SLI in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.81 15.78
Recency 6 February 2017 4 June 2012
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm

Quadro P4000 has a 82.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 680M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P4000 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 680M SLI 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 P4000
Quadro P4000
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M SLI
GeForce GTX 680M SLI

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.


4 309 votes

Rate Quadro P4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 3 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680M SLI 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.