Quadro K4100M vs Quadro K5000M
Quadro K4100M
Popular choices:
Quadro K5000M
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 K4100M is positioned at rank 52 and the Quadro K5000M is on rank 50, so the Quadro K5000M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K4100M
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K5000M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro K5000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro K4100M.
| Insight | Quadro K4100M | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro K4100M offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro K4100M holds the technical lead. Priced at $261 (vs $509), it costs 49% less, resulting in a 92.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro K4100M | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+92.8%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($261) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($509) |
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 K4100M and Quadro K5000M
Quadro K4100M
The Quadro K4100M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 706 MHz. It has 1152 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,773 points. Launch price was $1,499.
Quadro K5000M
The Quadro K5000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 7 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 601 MHz. It has 1344 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,805 points. Launch price was $329.99.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro K4100M scores 2,773 and the Quadro K5000M reaches 2,805 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K4100M is built on Kepler while the Quadro K5000M uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,152 (Quadro K4100M) vs 1,344 (Quadro K5000M). Raw compute: 1.627 TFLOPS (Quadro K4100M) vs 1.615 TFLOPS (Quadro K5000M).
| Feature | Quadro K4100M | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,773 | 2,805+1% |
| Architecture | Kepler | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1152 | 1344+17% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.627 TFLOPS | 1.615 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 96 | 112+17% |
| L1 Cache | 96 KB | 112 KB+17% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K4100M | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 K4100M | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 K4100M draws 100W versus the Quadro K5000M's 100W — a 0% difference. The Quadro K5000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K4100M) vs 350W (Quadro K5000M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro K4100M | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 81°C |
| Perf/Watt | 27.7 | 28.1+1% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro K4100M costs 48.7% less ($248 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 10.6 (Quadro K4100M) vs 5.5 (Quadro K5000M) — the Quadro K4100M offers 92.7% better value. The Quadro K4100M is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2012).
| Feature | Quadro K4100M | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1499 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $261-49% | $509 |
| Performance per Dollar | 10.6+93% | 5.5 |
| Codename | GK104 | GK104 |
| Release | July 23 2013 | August 7 2012 |
| Ranking | #604 | #600 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro K4100M and Quadro K5000M
