FirePro W8100 vs Quadro M4000
FirePro W8100
Popular choices:
Quadro M4000
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FirePro W8100 is positioned at rank 254 and the Quadro M4000 is on rank 159, so the Quadro M4000 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W8100
Performance Per Dollar Quadro M4000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro W8100 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro M4000.
| Insight | FirePro W8100 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro W8100 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro W8100 holds the technical lead. Priced at $200 (vs $350), it costs 43% less, resulting in a 78.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro W8100 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+78.5%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($200) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($350) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro W8100 and Quadro M4000
FirePro W8100
The FirePro W8100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 23 2014. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 824 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 220W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,812 points.
Quadro M4000
The Quadro M4000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 18 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 975 MHz to 1013 MHz. It has 1,280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,679 points.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro W8100 scores 6,812 and the Quadro M4000 reaches 6,679 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro W8100 is built on GCN 2.0 while the Quadro M4000 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,560 (FirePro W8100) vs 1 (Quadro M4000). Raw compute: 4.219 TFLOPS (FirePro W8100) vs 2.496 TFLOPS (Quadro M4000).
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,812+2% | 6,679 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2560+100% | 1,280 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.219 TFLOPS+69% | 2.496 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 160+100% | 80 |
| L1 Cache | 640 KB+33% | 480 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 8 GB of video memory. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (FirePro W8100) vs 2 MB (Quadro M4000) — the Quadro M4000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FirePro W8100) vs 12 (12_1) (Quadro M4000). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 4.
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.4+17% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 6+50% | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (FirePro W8100) vs 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M4000). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs 1st Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2,MVC (FirePro W8100) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Quadro M4000).
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 2.0 | 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | 1st Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2,MVC | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro W8100 draws 220W versus the Quadro M4000's 100W — a 75% difference. The Quadro M4000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro W8100) vs 350W (Quadro M4000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 241mm vs 241mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 87°C vs 82°C.
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 220W | 100W-55% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 241mm | 241mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 87°C | 82°C-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 31.0 | 66.8+115% |
Value Analysis
The FirePro W8100 launched at $2499 MSRP and currently averages $200, while the Quadro M4000 launched at $791 and now averages $350. The FirePro W8100 costs 42.9% less ($150 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 34.1 (FirePro W8100) vs 19.1 (Quadro M4000) — the FirePro W8100 offers 78.5% better value. The Quadro M4000 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2499 | $791-68% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $200-43% | $350 |
| Performance per Dollar | 34.1+79% | 19.1 |
| Codename | Hawaii | GM204 |
| Release | June 23 2014 | August 18 2015 |
| Ranking | #361 | #392 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FirePro W8100 and Quadro M4000
