
Quadro M4000 vs GRID P40-3Q

Quadro M4000
Popular choices:

GRID P40-3Q
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 GRID P40-3Q is on rank 341, 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 GRID P40-3Q
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro M4000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.7% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (8 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GRID P40-3Q.
| Insight | Quadro M4000 | GRID P40-3Q |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro M4000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro M4000 holds the technical lead. Priced at $350 (vs $5,699), it costs 94% less, resulting in a 1555.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro M4000 | GRID P40-3Q |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1555.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($350) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($5,699) |
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 GRID P40-3Q

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.

GRID P40-3Q
The GRID P40-3Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 28 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,570 points. Launch price was $469.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro M4000 scores 6,679 and the GRID P40-3Q reaches 6,570 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M4000 is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GRID P40-3Q uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1 (Quadro M4000) vs 1,536 (GRID P40-3Q). Raw compute: 2.496 TFLOPS (Quadro M4000) vs 2.289 TFLOPS (GRID P40-3Q).
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GRID P40-3Q |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,679+2% | 6,570 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1,280 | 1536+20% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.496 TFLOPS+9% | 2.289 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 128+60% |
| L1 Cache | 480 KB+275% | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GRID P40-3Q |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The Quadro M4000 comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the GRID P40-3Q has 4 GB. The Quadro M4000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Quadro M4000) vs 0.5 MB (GRID P40-3Q) — the Quadro M4000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GRID P40-3Q |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+100% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (Quadro M4000) vs 12 (11_0) (GRID P40-3Q). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GRID P40-3Q |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M4000) vs Tesla NVENC x24 (GRID P40-3Q). Decoder: 1st Gen NVDEC vs Tesla NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Quadro M4000) vs H.264,HEVC (GRID P40-3Q).
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GRID P40-3Q |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) | Tesla NVENC x24 |
| Decoder | 1st Gen NVDEC | Tesla NVDEC |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 | H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro M4000 draws 100W versus the GRID P40-3Q's 225W — a 76.9% difference. The Quadro M4000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M4000) vs 350W (GRID P40-3Q). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 241mm vs 267mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 82°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GRID P40-3Q |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W-56% | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 241mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 82°C-4% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 66.8+129% | 29.2 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro M4000 launched at $791 MSRP and currently averages $350, while the GRID P40-3Q launched at $5699 and now averages $5699. The Quadro M4000 costs 93.9% less ($5349 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 19.1 (Quadro M4000) vs 1.2 (GRID P40-3Q) — the Quadro M4000 offers 1491.7% better value. The Quadro M4000 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2013).
| Feature | Quadro M4000 | GRID P40-3Q |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $791-86% | $5699 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $350-94% | $5699 |
| Performance per Dollar | 19.1+1492% | 1.2 |
| Codename | GM204 | GK104 |
| Release | August 18 2015 | June 28 2013 |
| Ranking | #392 | #628 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.











