CPU
GPU
Quadro M4000M
Popular choices:
Quadro K5200
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 M4000M is positioned at rank 4 and the Quadro K5200 is on rank 254, so the Quadro M4000M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro M4000M
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K5200
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro K5200 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0% 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 Quadro M4000M.
| Insight | Quadro M4000M | Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro K5200 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 M4000M and Quadro K5200
Quadro M4000M
The Quadro M4000M 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: 6,148 points.
Quadro K5200
The Quadro K5200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 22 2014. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 667 MHz to 771 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,149 points. Launch price was $1,699.74.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro M4000M scores 6,148 and the Quadro K5200 reaches 6,149 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M4000M is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro K5200 uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1 (Quadro M4000M) vs 2,304 (Quadro K5200). Raw compute: 2.496 TFLOPS (Quadro M4000M) vs 3.553 TFLOPS (Quadro K5200). Boost clocks: 1013 MHz vs 771 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro M4000M | Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,148 | 6,149 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1,280 | 2304+80% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.496 TFLOPS | 3.553 TFLOPS+42% |
| Boost Clock | 1013 MHz+31% | 771 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+33% | 48 |
| TMUs | 80 | 192+140% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro M4000M | Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 M4000M comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro K5200 has 8 GB. The Quadro K5200 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit.
| Feature | Quadro M4000M | Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro M4000M draws 100W versus the Quadro K5200's 150W — a 40% difference. The Quadro M4000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M4000M) vs 350W (Quadro K5200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro M4000M | Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W-33% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 61.5+50% | 41.0 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro M4000M is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | Quadro M4000M | Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $2250 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $70 |
| Codename | GM204 | GK110B |
| Release | August 18 2015 | July 22 2014 |
| Ranking | #392 | #391 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro M4000M and Quadro K5200
