GeForce GTX 960 vs Quadro M4000M

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.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro M4000M

#1

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

144%

#4

Quadro M4000M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro M4000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 960.

Insight	GeForce GTX 960	Quadro M4000M
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.2%)	✅Leading raw performance (+0.2%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	Normal Efficiency	Normal Efficiency
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro M4000M 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.

GeForce GTX 960 Benchmark Check

Quadro M4000M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 960 and Quadro M4000M

GeForce GTX 960

The GeForce GTX 960 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 22 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1127 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,133 points. Launch price was $199.

Quadro M4000M

The Quadro M4000M 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: 6,148 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 960 scores 6,133 and the Quadro M4000M reaches 6,148 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 960 is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro M4000M uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 960) vs 1 (Quadro M4000M). Raw compute: 2.413 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 960) vs 2.496 TFLOPS (Quadro M4000M). Boost clocks: 1178 MHz vs 1013 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 960	Quadro M4000M
G3D Mark Score	6,133	6,148
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0	Maxwell 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1024	1,280+25%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.413 TFLOPS	2.496 TFLOPS+3%
Boost Clock	1178 MHz+16%	1013 MHz
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	64	80+25%
L1 Cache	384 KB	480 KB+25%
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 960	Quadro M4000M
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)

Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 960) vs 2 MB (Quadro M4000M) — the Quadro M4000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 960	Quadro M4000M
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	256-bit+100%
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 960) vs 12 (12_1) (Quadro M4000M). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 960	Quadro M4000M
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Vulkan	1.3	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (5th Gen) (GeForce GTX 960) vs NVENC 5 (Quadro M4000M). Decoder: NVDEC (2nd Gen) vs NVDEC 1. Supported codecs: HEVC,H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,VP8 (GeForce GTX 960) vs H.264,MPEG-2,MPEG-4,VC-1,DivX (Quadro M4000M).

Feature	GeForce GTX 960	Quadro M4000M
Encoder	NVENC (5th Gen)	NVENC 5
Decoder	NVDEC (2nd Gen)	NVDEC 1
Codecs	HEVC,H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,VP8	H.264,MPEG-2,MPEG-4,VC-1,DivX

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 960 draws 100W versus the Quadro M4000M's 100W — a 0% difference. The Quadro M4000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 400W (GeForce GTX 960) vs 350W (Quadro M4000M). Power connectors: 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 75 C vs 80°C.