Quadro FX 4000 vs Radeon RX 560

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 560 with Quadro FX 4000, including specs and performance data.

RX 560
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
9.47
+3542%

RX 560 outperforms FX 4000 by a whopping 3542% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4671350
Place by popularity90not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.48no data
Power efficiency8.650.13
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code namePolaris 21NV40
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date18 April 2017 (7 years ago)1 April 2004 (20 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99 $2,199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 560 and FX 4000 have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores1024no data
Core clock speed1175 MHz375 MHz
Boost clock speed1275 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,000 million222 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt142 Watt
Texture fill rate81.604.500
Floating-point processing power2.611 TFLOPSno data
ROPs168
TMUs6412

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 x8AGP 8x
Length170 mmno data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x Molex

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB256 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz500 MHz
Memory bandwidth112.0 GB/s32 GB/s

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model6.43.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

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.

RX 560 9.47
+3542%
FX 4000 0.26

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.

RX 560 3648
+3512%
FX 4000 101

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 HD350−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.83no data

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.47 0.26
Recency 18 April 2017 1 April 2004
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 142 Watt

RX 560 has a 3542.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 828.6% more advanced lithography process, and 89.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 560 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 560 is a desktop card while Quadro FX 4000 is a workstation 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.


AMD Radeon RX 560
Radeon RX 560
NVIDIA Quadro FX 4000
Quadro FX 4000

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.


3.6 2851 vote

Rate Radeon RX 560 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 21 vote

Rate Quadro FX 4000 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.