Quadro 4000M vs GeForce GTX 280
Quadro 4000M
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 280
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 Quadro 4000M is positioned at rank 91 and the GeForce GTX 280 is on rank 314, 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 Quadro 4000M
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 280
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 | Quadro 4000M | GeForce GTX 280 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| 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 Quadro 4000M and GeForce GTX 280
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.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro 4000M scores 1,287 and the GeForce GTX 280 reaches 1,285 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro 4000M is built on Fermi while the GeForce GTX 280 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 40 nm vs 65 nm. Shader units: 336 (Quadro 4000M) vs 240 (GeForce GTX 280). Raw compute: 0.6384 TFLOPS (Quadro 4000M) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 280).
| Feature | Quadro 4000M | GeForce GTX 280 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,287 | 1,285 |
| Architecture | Fermi | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 65 nm |
| Shading Units | 336+40% | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6384 TFLOPS+3% | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 56 | 80+43% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro 4000M | GeForce GTX 280 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro 4000M comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 280 has 1 GB. The Quadro 4000M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (Quadro 4000M) vs 256 KB (GeForce GTX 280) — the Quadro 4000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro 4000M | GeForce GTX 280 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB+100% | 1 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro 4000M draws 100W versus the GeForce GTX 280's 236W — a 81% difference. The Quadro 4000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro 4000M) vs 550W (GeForce GTX 280). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin.
| Feature | Quadro 4000M | GeForce GTX 280 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W-58% | 236W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-36% | 550W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| Length | — | 267mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | — | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 85 |
| Perf/Watt | 12.9+139% | 5.4 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro 4000M is the newer GPU (2011 vs 2008).
| Feature | Quadro 4000M | GeForce GTX 280 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $649 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $649 |
| Codename | GF104 | GT200 |
| Release | February 22 2011 | June 16 2008 |
| Ranking | #801 | #802 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro 4000M and GeForce GTX 280
