
Quadro M4000 vs GeForce GTX 1060

Quadro M4000
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 1060
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 M4000 is positioned at rank #159 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 M4000
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1060 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 50.7% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro M4000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro M4000 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-50.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+50.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+33.3%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1060 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 1060 holds the technical lead. Priced at $60 (vs $350), it costs 83% less, resulting in a 779% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro M4000 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+779%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($350) | ✅More affordable ($60) |
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 GeForce GTX 1060

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.

GeForce GTX 1060
The GeForce GTX 1060 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2016. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1607 MHz to 1733 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 180W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,064 points. Launch price was $599.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Quadro M4000 scores 6,679 versus the GeForce GTX 1060's 10,064 — the GeForce GTX 1060 leads by 50.7%. The Quadro M4000 is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1060 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 1 (Quadro M4000) vs 2,560 (GeForce GTX 1060). Raw compute: 2.496 TFLOPS (Quadro M4000) vs 8.873 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1060). Boost clocks: 1013 MHz vs 1733 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,679 | 10,064+51% |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 1,280 | 2560+100% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.496 TFLOPS | 8.873 TFLOPS+255% |
| Boost Clock | 1013 MHz | 1733 MHz+71% |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 80 | 160+100% |
| L1 Cache | 480 KB | 960 KB+100% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 M4000 comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1060 has 6 GB. The Quadro M4000 offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 211 GB/s (Quadro M4000) vs 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1060) — a 9.9% advantage for the Quadro M4000. Bus width: 256-bit vs 192-bit.
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+33% | 6 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 211 GB/s+10% | 192 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+33% | 192-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (Quadro M4000) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1060). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M4000) vs NVENC (Pascal) (GeForce GTX 1060). Decoder: 1st Gen NVDEC vs NVDEC (Pascal). Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Quadro M4000) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC (GeForce GTX 1060).
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) | NVENC (Pascal) |
| Decoder | 1st Gen NVDEC | NVDEC (Pascal) |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 | H.264,H.265/HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro M4000 draws 100W versus the GeForce GTX 1060's 180W — a 57.1% difference. The Quadro M4000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M4000) vs 400W (GeForce GTX 1060). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 6-pin. Card length: 241mm vs 173mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W-44% | 180W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-13% | 400W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 6-pin |
| Length | 241mm | 173mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 82°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 66.8+19% | 55.9 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro M4000 launched at $791 MSRP and currently averages $350, while the GeForce GTX 1060 launched at $249 and now averages $60. The GeForce GTX 1060 costs 82.9% less ($290 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 19.1 (Quadro M4000) vs 167.7 (GeForce GTX 1060) — the GeForce GTX 1060 offers 778% better value. The GeForce GTX 1060 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2015).
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $791 | $249-69% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $350 | $60-83% |
| Performance per Dollar | 19.1 | 167.7+778% |
| Codename | GM204 | GP104 |
| Release | August 18 2015 | May 27 2016 |
| Ranking | #392 | #137 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.











