NVIDIA GeForce 945M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4100M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce 945M and NVIDIA Quadro K4100M are two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from different NVIDIA lineups, and the benchmark data shows a clear split between compute performance and feature modernity. The Quadro K4100M wins the only shared benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a score of 9149 against the 945M's 8099, a decisive 11.5% margin. However, the GeForce 945M is built on a newer architecture and offers a higher Vulkan API version, making it the more modern foundation despite its lower raw compute score. The verdict from the data: the Quadro K4100M is the choice for raw compute throughput and larger memory capacity, while the GeForce 945M is the pick for users prioritizing a more recent feature set and lower power draw.

The Verdict

The data presents a straightforward choice for two distinct user profiles. The NVIDIA Quadro K4100M is the outright performance winner in the shared benchmark, delivering 9149 points in Geekbench OpenCL compared to the GeForce 945M's 8099. This 11.5% advantage is substantial and positions the Quadro as the superior option for compute-heavy workloads. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, further solidifies its lead for tasks that are memory-sensitive. The GeForce 945M, by contrast, offers only 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, capping bandwidth at 28.80 GB/s — a 73.5 GB/s deficit that will bottleneck any memory-intensive application.

Yet the GeForce 945M is not without its arguments. It posts a higher percentile rank, sitting at the 42nd percentile against all GPUs, while the Quadro K4100M sits just below at the 41st percentile. This suggests that despite losing the head-to-head, the GeForce is marginally better positioned in the broader performance distribution. The 945M also draws significantly less power, with a 75 W TDP versus the Quadro's 100 W, and it supports Vulkan 1.4 compared to the Quadro's 1.2.175, offering a more modern API foundation. For users who prioritize energy efficiency, newer software support, and a slightly better overall percentile standing over raw compute, the GeForce 945M is the data-backed pick. The Quadro K4100M, meanwhile, is the clear choice for anyone whose workload demands maximum compute throughput, higher memory capacity, and greater bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is wide, with each built on a different NVIDIA design philosophy. The GeForce 945M uses the GM107 chip, based on the Maxwell architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This chip packs 1,870 million transistors into a 148 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6M per mm². The Quadro K4100M, conversely, uses the GK104 chip, built on the older Kepler architecture, also on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The GK104 is a substantially larger and more complex chip, containing 3,540 million transistors across a 294 mm² die, with a slightly lower transistor density of 12.0M per mm². The 1,670 million transistor difference and 146 mm² die size gap highlight the Quadro's more elaborate hardware foundation.

The core configurations diverge sharply. The Quadro K4100M fields 1,152 shading units, 96 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 render output units (ROPs). The GeForce 945M, by contrast, is equipped with 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This gives the Quadro a 512-shader-unit advantage, alongside 56 more TMUs and 16 more ROPs, which directly explains its higher texture and pixel processing capabilities. The memory subsystems are equally distinct: the Quadro uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit interface, while the GeForce uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit interface. The resulting bandwidth figures — 102.4 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s — represent a 3.5x gap in favor of the Quadro.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The GeForce 945M runs at a base clock of 928 MHz with a boost up to 1020 MHz, while the Quadro K4100M is locked at a flat 706 MHz for both base and boost. The GeForce's higher clocks help it close some of the gap in raw throughput, but the Quadro's massive hardware advantage wins out. The compute output confirms this: the Quadro delivers 1.627 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the GeForce manages 1,305.6 GFLOPS. Pixel rates are nearly identical, with the Quadro at 16.94 GPixel/s and the GeForce at 16.32 GPixel/s, but the texture rate diverges significantly — 67.78 GTexel/s for the Quadro versus 40.80 GTexel/s for the GeForce.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are unambiguous. The NVIDIA Quadro K4100M scores 9149, while the NVIDIA GeForce 945M scores 8099. The delta percentage of -11.5% (relative to the 945M) confirms the Quadro's clear victory. This is not a marginal win; it is a substantial double-digit performance gap that places the Quadro firmly ahead in compute-oriented tasks.

The context from nearest rivals reinforces this outcome. The 945M's average benchmark score of 8099 places it in a tight cluster with the NVIDIA GRID K2 (8080, 0.2% ahead of the 945M), the AMD Radeon R9 M360 (8129, 0.4% behind the 945M), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M (8135, 0.4% behind the 945M). The Quadro K4100M's average score of 7906, however, sits in a slightly different neighborhood, with rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 (7925, 0.2% behind the Quadro) and the NVIDIA Quadro P5000 (8039, 1.7% behind the Quadro). The Quadro's head-to-head win over the 945M is notable because the 945M's own rivals are all closely matched to it, while the Quadro's rivals are generally faster — yet the Quadro still beats the 945M directly.

The win tally reflects this: the Quadro K4100M secures 1 win in the head-to-head benchmarks, while the GeForce 945M secures 0. This single-test result, however, should be weighed against the 945M's stronger percentile ranking (42nd versus 41st) and its more modern architecture. The benchmark data shows a clear compute advantage for the Quadro, but the GeForce's newer Maxwell design and higher Vulkan support suggest it may offer better long-term software compatibility, even if it cannot match the Quadro's raw numbers today.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for these two GPUs reveal numerous points of divergence, with only a few shared characteristics. Both are MXM Modules with an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, both are built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, and both feature "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs. Their API support for DirectX (12, 11_0) and OpenGL (4.6) is identical. Beyond these, the differences are extensive.

• Chip and Architecture: GM107 (Maxwell) versus GK104 (Kepler).
• Transistors: 1,870 million versus 3,540 million.
• Die Size: 148 mm² versus 294 mm².
• Transistor Density: 12.6M / mm² versus 12.0M / mm².
• Base Clock: 928 MHz versus 706 MHz.
• Boost Clock: 1020 MHz versus 706 MHz (the Quadro has no boost).
• Memory Clock: 900 MHz / 1800 Mbps effective versus 800 MHz / 3.2 Gbps effective.
• Memory Size: 2 GB versus 4 GB.
• Memory Type: DDR3 versus GDDR5.
• Memory Bus Width: 128 bit versus 256 bit.
• Memory Bandwidth: 28.80 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s.
• Shading Units: 640 versus 1152.
• TMUs: 40 versus 96.
• ROPs: 16 versus 32.
• Pixel Rate: 16.32 GPixel/s versus 16.94 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: 40.80 GTexel/s versus 67.78 GTexel/s.
• FP32 Performance: 1,305.6 GFLOPS versus 1.627 TFLOPS.
• TDP: 75 W versus 100 W.
• Vulkan API: 1.4 versus 1.2.175.
• Release Date: 2015-10-26 versus 2013-07-22.
• Predecessor: GeForce 800M versus Quadro Fermi-M.
• Successor: GeForce 10 Mobile versus Quadro Maxwell-M.
• Launch MSRP: None versus 1,499 USD.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher benchmark score in the shared test?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4100M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 9149, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce 945M's 8099, a margin of 11.5%.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The Quadro K4100M offers 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The GeForce 945M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, providing 28.80 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient?

A: The GeForce 945M has a TDP of 75 W, while the Quadro K4100M has a TDP of 100 W, making the GeForce the more power-efficient option.

Q: What are the core counts for each GPU?

A: The Quadro K4100M has 1152 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The GeForce 945M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same API versions?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. For Vulkan, the GeForce 945M supports version 1.4, while the Quadro K4100M supports version 1.2.175.

Q: How do their percentile rankings compare?

A: The GeForce 945M sits at the 42nd percentile against all GPUs, while the Quadro K4100M is at the 41st percentile, indicating a marginally better overall standing for the GeForce despite its lower benchmark score.