Quadro K4000M vs Quadro P520
Quadro K4000M
Popular choices:
Quadro P520
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 K4000M is positioned at rank 57 and the Quadro P520 is on rank 111, so the Quadro K4000M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K4000M
Performance Per Dollar Quadro P520
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Quadro P520 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2012). The Quadro P520 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro K4000M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro K4000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro P520.
| Insight | Quadro K4000M | Quadro P520 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro K4000M 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 K4000M and Quadro P520
Quadro K4000M
The Quadro K4000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 1 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 601 MHz. It has 960 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,061 points.
Quadro P520
The Quadro P520 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 23 2019. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1303 MHz to 1493 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 18W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,034 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro K4000M scores 2,061 and the Quadro P520 reaches 2,034 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K4000M is built on Kepler while the Quadro P520 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 960 (Quadro K4000M) vs 384 (Quadro P520). Raw compute: 1.154 TFLOPS (Quadro K4000M) vs 1.147 TFLOPS (Quadro P520).
| Feature | Quadro K4000M | Quadro P520 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,061+1% | 2,034 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 960+150% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.154 TFLOPS | 1.147 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 80+233% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 80 KB | 144 KB+80% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K4000M | Quadro P520 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Quadro K4000M | Quadro P520 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K4000M draws 100W versus the Quadro P520's 18W — a 139% difference. The Quadro P520 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K4000M) vs 350W (Quadro P520). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro K4000M | Quadro P520 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 18W-82% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Perf/Watt | 20.6 | 113.0+449% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro P520 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2012).
| Feature | Quadro K4000M | Quadro P520 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $150 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $150 |
| Codename | GK104 | GP108 |
| Release | June 1 2012 | May 23 2019 |
| Ranking | #676 | #677 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro K4000M and Quadro P520
