GeForce GTX 280 vs Quadro 4000M
GeForce GTX 280
Popular choices:
Quadro 4000M
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 GeForce GTX 280 is positioned at rank 314 and the Quadro 4000M is on rank 91, so the Quadro 4000M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 280
Performance Per Dollar Quadro 4000M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro 4000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.2% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (2 GB vs 1 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 280.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 280 | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi (2010−2014)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro 4000M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 GeForce GTX 280 and Quadro 4000M
GeForce GTX 280
The GeForce GTX 280 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 16 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 236W. Manufactured using 65 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,285 points. Launch price was $649.
Quadro 4000M
The Quadro 4000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 22 2011. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 475 MHz. It has 336 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,287 points. Launch price was $449.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 280 scores 1,285 and the Quadro 4000M reaches 1,287 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 280 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Quadro 4000M uses Fermi, both on 65 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 240 (GeForce GTX 280) vs 336 (Quadro 4000M). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 280) vs 0.6384 TFLOPS (Quadro 4000M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 280 | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,285 | 1,287 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Fermi |
| Process Node | 65 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 336+40% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 0.6384 TFLOPS+3% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80+43% | 56 |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 280 | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 280 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro 4000M has 2 GB. The Quadro 4000M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (GeForce GTX 280) vs 512 KB (Quadro 4000M) — the Quadro 4000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 280 | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 2 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 280 draws 236W versus the Quadro 4000M's 100W — a 81% difference. The Quadro 4000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 550W (GeForce GTX 280) vs 350W (Quadro 4000M). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 280 | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 236W | 100W-58% |
| Recommended PSU | 550W | 350W-36% |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 85 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 5.4 | 12.9+139% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro 4000M is the newer GPU (2011 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 280 | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $649 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $649 | — |
| Codename | GT200 | GF104 |
| Release | June 16 2008 | February 22 2011 |
| Ranking | #802 | #801 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 280 and Quadro 4000M
