NVIDIA GeForce 930M vs NVIDIA Quadro 4000 Comparison

# The Verdict

The NVIDIA Quadro 4000 and the NVIDIA GeForce 930M occupy different corners of the GPU market. The Quadro 4000 is a workstation-oriented Fermi generation card with 256 shading units, 32 ROPs, and 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The GeForce 930M is a Maxwell generation mobile GPU with 384 shading units, 8 ROPs, and 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus. Benchmark data from the database shows the 930M holds a narrow edge in the recorded OpenCL score: 5046 versus 4979 for the Quadro, a 1.3% difference. However, the Quadro 4000 counters with a higher average score across all recorded runs (4979 vs 4388 for the 930M) and sits at the 29th percentile among all GPUs, while the 930M sits at the 26th percentile. The verdict from the data: the 930M wins the single benchmark, but the Quadro 4000 is the more consistently strong performer in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural families and target different usage models. The Quadro 4000 is built on the GF100 chip, a Fermi architecture part manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC, integrating 3,100 million transistors on a 529 mm² die. The GeForce 930M uses the GM108S chip, a Maxwell architecture part built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. The density difference is stark: 5.9 million transistors per mm² on the Fermi chip versus 13.2 million per mm² on the Maxwell chip, reflecting the generational gap in manufacturing.

Memory configurations also differ. The Quadro 4000 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 89.86 GB/s. The 930M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64 bit bus, good for 12.80 GB/s. The 930M's memory runs at an effective 1600 Mbps, while the Quadro's memory runs at 702 MHz. The Quadro's wider bus and faster memory give it a massive bandwidth advantage, 7x that of the 930M, but the mobile chip compensates with its higher core counts.

The Quadro 4000 has 256 shading units and 32 texture mapping units, with a pixel rate of 7.600 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 15.20 GTexel/s. It supports a 142 W TDP and uses a single 6-pin power connector, with a 300 W suggested PSU. The 930M has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and a pixel rate of 4.392 GPixel/s with a texture rate of 13.18 GTexel/s. The 930M is an integrated part (IGP) with no external power connectors, and its TDP is 33 W. The Quadro is a full-height, single-slot card; the 930M is integrated into the system. The Quadro also has much more display connectivity: 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort outputs, whereas the 930M has portable device dependent outputs.

API support also differs. The Quadro 4000 lists DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6; the 930M lists DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The single head-to-head OpenCL benchmark in the database favors the GeForce 930M by 1.3% (5046 vs 4979). That benchmark result is consistent with the 930M's higher raw compute figures: 421.6 GFLOPS FP32 versus 486.4 GFLOPS for the Quadro, and a higher shading unit count (384 vs 256). For workloads dominated by raw shading and compute, the 930M is the faster part.

The Quadro 4000 wins in scenarios that stress memory bandwidth and professional display features. Its 89.86 GB/s of bandwidth is a 7x advantage over the 930M's 12.80 GB/s. The 256-bit bus and 702 MHz memory clock feed that bandwidth. The 930M's 64-bit bus is the bottleneck for high resolution textures and frame buffers. The Quadro also supports 2x DisplayPort outputs and DVI, where the 930M is tied to whatever the laptop's built-in display supports. For multi-display professional work, the Quadro is the clear pick.

The production status also separates them. The Quadro 4000 is listed as end-of-life, released in November 2010 at a launch MSRP of 1,199 USD. The 930M is end-of-life, released in March 2015. The Quadro's predecessor is the Quadro FX Tesla series and it was succeeded by the Quadro Kepler line. The 930M follows the GeForce 800M and was succeeded by the GeForce 10 Mobile series.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930M records the higher score in the geekbench_opencl test: 5046 versus 4979 for the Quadro 4000, a 1.3% difference. However, the Quadro 4000 has a higher average score across all recorded runs (4979 vs 4388).

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each card?

A: The Quadro 4000 has a 256-bit GDDR5 bus with 89.86 GB/s of bandwidth. The GeForce 930M has a 64 bit DDR3 bus with a 12.80 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the transistor count?

A: The Quadro 4000 has 3,100 million transistors on a 529 mm² die. The 930M has 1,020 million on a 77 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU supports more shading units?

A: The GeForce 930M has 384 shading units, while the Quadro 4000 has 256.

Q: When did these cards release?

A: The Quadro 4000 launched on 2010-11-01. The GeForce 930M launched on 2015-03-12.

Q: What power connectors are required?

A: The Quadro 4000 uses a single 6-pin power connector, with a 300 W suggested PSU. The 930M is an integrated GPU with no power connectors and no suggested PSU figure.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The OpenCL benchmark in the database gives the GeForce 930M a narrow victory over the Quadro 4000. In the geekbench_opencl test, the 930M scored 5046 against 4979 for the Quadro, a 1.3% margin. The Quadro 4000's average score across all recorded runs is 4979, but the 930M has a lower average of 4388.

The Quadro 4000 counters with 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. That memory subsystem is the main reason the Quadro wins any scenario where frame buffers are large and textures are huge. The 930M's DDR3 on a 64-bit bus is only 1/7 of the bandwidth, but does it have 384 shading units that can be put into play.

The 930M's advantage in compute is visible in its FP32 rate: 421.6 GFLOPS vs 486.4 GFLOPS. It also has a higher pixel rate, 4.392 GPixel/s vs 7.600 GPixel/s. But the Quadro's advantage in texture rate is nearly as large: 15.20 GTexel/s against 13.18 GTexel/s, which helps if the workload is texture heavy.

The database data shows the GeForce 930M wins the single OpenCL benchmark, but the Quadro 4000 is the more consistent and better-rounded part thanks to its workstation feature set, higher memory bandwidth and EOL status. The choice between them is simple: raw shading performance, then the GeForce 930M; for display flexibility and memory heavy workloads, then the Quadro 4000.