
Quadro K2000D vs FirePro M4000

Quadro K2000D
Popular choices:

FirePro 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. The Quadro K2000D is positioned at rank #257 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K2000D
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro K2000D is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FirePro M4000.
| Insight | Quadro K2000D | FirePro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| 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 M4000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro M4000 holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $35), it costs 14% less, resulting in a 16.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro K2000D | FirePro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+16.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($35) | ✅More affordable ($30) |
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 K2000D and FirePro M4000

Quadro K2000D
The Quadro K2000D is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 1 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 954 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 51W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,600 points. Launch price was $599.

FirePro M4000
The FirePro M4000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 27 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 675 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,596 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro K2000D scores 1,600 and the FirePro M4000 reaches 1,596 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K2000D is built on Kepler while the FirePro M4000 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (Quadro K2000D) vs 512 (FirePro M4000). Raw compute: 0.7327 TFLOPS (Quadro K2000D) vs 0.6912 TFLOPS (FirePro M4000).
| Feature | Quadro K2000D | FirePro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,600 | 1,596 |
| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 512+33% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7327 TFLOPS+6% | 0.6912 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 32 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 32 KB | 128 KB+300% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K2000D | FirePro 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 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Quadro K2000D | FirePro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (Quadro K2000D) vs 12 (FirePro M4000). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 6.
| Feature | Quadro K2000D | FirePro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 6+50% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st Gen (Quadro K2000D) vs VCE 1.0 (FirePro M4000). Decoder: NVDEC 1st Gen vs UVD 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro K2000D) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (FirePro M4000).
| Feature | Quadro K2000D | FirePro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 1st Gen | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 1st Gen | UVD 4.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K2000D draws 51W versus the FirePro M4000's 33W — a 42.9% difference. The FirePro M4000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K2000D) vs 350W (FirePro M4000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 202mm vs 82mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 75°C.
| Feature | Quadro K2000D | FirePro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 51W | 33W-35% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 202mm | 82mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 80 | 75°C-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 31.4 | 48.4+54% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro K2000D launched at $599 MSRP and currently averages $35, while the FirePro M4000 launched at $0 and now averages $30. The FirePro M4000 costs 14.3% less ($5 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 45.7 (Quadro K2000D) vs 53.2 (FirePro M4000) — the FirePro M4000 offers 16.4% better value. The Quadro K2000D is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2012).
| Feature | Quadro K2000D | FirePro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $599 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $35 | $30-14% |
| Performance per Dollar | 45.7 | 53.2+16% |
| Codename | GK107 | Chelsea |
| Release | March 1 2013 | June 27 2012 |
| Ranking | #750 | #752 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















