
Quadro M5000M
Popular choices:

Quadro P4000 Max-Q
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
Quadro M5000M
2015Why buy it
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
Quadro P4000 Max-Q
2017Why buy it
- ✅More future proof: Pascal (2016−2021) on 16nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
Quadro M5000M
2015Quadro P4000 Max-Q
2017Why buy it
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
Why buy it
- ✅More future proof: Pascal (2016−2021) on 16nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
Quick Answers
So, is Quadro P4000 Max-Q better than Quadro M5000M?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does Quadro M5000M make more sense than Quadro P4000 Max-Q?
Games Benchmarks
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 9800X3D 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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Quadro M5000M | Quadro P4000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 105 FPS | 82 FPS |
| medium | 89 FPS | 71 FPS |
| high | 73 FPS | 60 FPS |
| ultra | 48 FPS | 40 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 89 FPS | 72 FPS |
| medium | 75 FPS | 63 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 36 FPS | 30 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 26 FPS |
| medium | 32 FPS | 24 FPS |
| high | 20 FPS | 17 FPS |
| ultra | 17 FPS | 14 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Quadro M5000M | Quadro P4000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 203 FPS | 222 FPS |
| medium | 174 FPS | 189 FPS |
| high | 128 FPS | 144 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 115 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 151 FPS | 166 FPS |
| medium | 125 FPS | 137 FPS |
| high | 100 FPS | 109 FPS |
| ultra | 75 FPS | 86 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 85 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 71 FPS | 77 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 64 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 48 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Quadro M5000M | Quadro P4000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 318 FPS | 338 FPS |
| medium | 254 FPS | 270 FPS |
| high | 212 FPS | 225 FPS |
| ultra | 159 FPS | 169 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 238 FPS | 253 FPS |
| medium | 191 FPS | 202 FPS |
| high | 159 FPS | 169 FPS |
| ultra | 119 FPS | 127 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 159 FPS | 169 FPS |
| medium | 127 FPS | 135 FPS |
| high | 106 FPS | 112 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 84 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Quadro M5000M | Quadro P4000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 219 FPS | 162 FPS |
| medium | 186 FPS | 133 FPS |
| high | 152 FPS | 116 FPS |
| ultra | 127 FPS | 98 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 172 FPS | 118 FPS |
| medium | 149 FPS | 99 FPS |
| high | 117 FPS | 87 FPS |
| ultra | 96 FPS | 73 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 97 FPS | 67 FPS |
| medium | 76 FPS | 54 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 42 FPS |
| ultra | 48 FPS | 32 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro M5000M and Quadro P4000 Max-Q

Quadro M5000M
Quadro M5000M
The Quadro M5000M 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 1051 MHz. It has 1,536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,056 points.

Quadro P4000 Max-Q
Quadro P4000 Max-Q
The Quadro P4000 Max-Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 11 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1114 MHz to 1228 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,500 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Quadro M5000M scores 7,056 versus the Quadro P4000 Max-Q's 7,500 — the Quadro P4000 Max-Q leads by 6.3%. The Quadro M5000M is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro P4000 Max-Q uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 1 (Quadro M5000M) vs 1,792 (Quadro P4000 Max-Q). Raw compute: 2.995 TFLOPS (Quadro M5000M) vs 4.401 TFLOPS (Quadro P4000 Max-Q). Boost clocks: 1051 MHz vs 1228 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Quadro P4000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,056 | 7,500+6% |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 1,536 | 1792+17% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.995 TFLOPS | 4.401 TFLOPS+47% |
| Boost Clock | 1051 MHz | 1228 MHz+17% |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 96 | 112+17% |
| L1 Cache | 576 KB | 672 KB+17% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Quadro P4000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro M5000M comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro P4000 Max-Q has 4 GB. The Quadro M5000M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit.
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Quadro P4000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.1 (Quadro M5000M) vs 12.1 (Quadro P4000 Max-Q). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Quadro P4000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5.0 (Quadro M5000M) vs NVENC 6.0 (Quadro P4000 Max-Q). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP6 vs PureVideo HD VP8. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264 (Quadro M5000M) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro P4000 Max-Q).
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Quadro P4000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5.0 | NVENC 6.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP6 | PureVideo HD VP8 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro M5000M draws 100W versus the Quadro P4000 Max-Q's 100W — a 0% difference. The Quadro P4000 Max-Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M5000M) vs 350W (Quadro P4000 Max-Q). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Quadro P4000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Perf/Watt | 70.6 | 75.0+6% |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












