Quadro M4000 vs FirePro W8100
Quadro M4000
Popular choices:
FirePro W8100
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 M4000 is positioned at rank 159 and the FirePro W8100 is on rank 254, so the Quadro M4000 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro M4000
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W8100
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro W8100 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro M4000.
| Insight | Quadro M4000 | FirePro W8100 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro W8100 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro W8100 holds the technical lead. Priced at $200 (vs $350), it costs 43% less, resulting in a 78.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro M4000 | FirePro W8100 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+78.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($350) | ✅More affordable ($200) |
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 M4000 and FirePro W8100
Quadro M4000
The Quadro M4000 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: 6,679 points.
FirePro W8100
The FirePro W8100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 23 2014. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 824 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 220W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,812 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro M4000 scores 6,679 and the FirePro W8100 reaches 6,812 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M4000 is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the FirePro W8100 uses GCN 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1 (Quadro M4000) vs 2,560 (FirePro W8100). Raw compute: 2.496 TFLOPS (Quadro M4000) vs 4.219 TFLOPS (FirePro W8100).
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | FirePro W8100 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,679 | 6,812+2% |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1,280 | 2560+100% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.496 TFLOPS | 4.219 TFLOPS+69% |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 80 | 160+100% |
| L1 Cache | 480 KB | 640 KB+33% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | FirePro W8100 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 8 GB of video memory. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Quadro M4000) vs 1 MB (FirePro W8100) — the Quadro M4000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | FirePro W8100 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (Quadro M4000) vs 12 (FirePro W8100). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 6.
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | FirePro W8100 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+17% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 6+50% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M4000) vs VCE 2.0 (FirePro W8100). Decoder: 1st Gen NVDEC vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Quadro M4000) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2,MVC (FirePro W8100).
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | FirePro W8100 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) | VCE 2.0 |
| Decoder | 1st Gen NVDEC | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2,MVC |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro M4000 draws 100W versus the FirePro W8100's 220W — a 75% difference. The Quadro M4000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M4000) vs 350W (FirePro W8100). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 241mm vs 241mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 82°C vs 87°C.
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | FirePro W8100 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W-55% | 220W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 241mm | 241mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 82°C-6% | 87°C |
| Perf/Watt | 66.8+115% | 31.0 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro M4000 launched at $791 MSRP and currently averages $350, while the FirePro W8100 launched at $2499 and now averages $200. The FirePro W8100 costs 42.9% less ($150 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 19.1 (Quadro M4000) vs 34.1 (FirePro W8100) — the FirePro W8100 offers 78.5% better value. The Quadro M4000 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | FirePro W8100 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $791-68% | $2499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $350 | $200-43% |
| Performance per Dollar | 19.1 | 34.1+79% |
| Codename | GM204 | Hawaii |
| Release | August 18 2015 | June 23 2014 |
| Ranking | #392 | #361 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro M4000 and FirePro W8100
