NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M and the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 are both end-of-life products, but they belong to completely different segments of the GPU market. The GT 555M is a mobile graphics processor from the GeForce 500M series, built for notebook gaming and general consumer use. The Quadro M4000 is a professional workstation card aimed at CAD, content creation, and scientific visualization. The benchmark data recorded in the database shows a clear performance hierarchy, though the comparison is not as one-sided as the raw specifications might suggest.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single direct head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this test, the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 achieves a score of 19118, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M scores 6493. This represents a 66% deficit for the GT 555M, meaning the Quadro M4000 delivers roughly three times the compute performance in this OpenCL workload. The delta is substantial and reflects the architectural and specification gap between the two products.

Looking at the broader benchmark picture, the GT 555M has only one benchmark entry in the database, that same Geekbench OpenCL score of 6493. Its average benchmark score is therefore 6493. The Quadro M4000, by contrast, has a much wider range of recorded tests. Its scores include 680 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 19118 in Geekbench OpenCL, 24640 in Geekbench Vulkan, 33 in Passmark DirectX 10, 49 in Passmark DirectX 11, 26 in Passmark DirectX 12, 113 in Passmark DirectX 9, 673 in Passmark G2D, 6680 in Passmark G3D, and 2660 in Passmark GPU Compute. The average benchmark score for the Quadro M4000 is 5467, which is actually lower than the GT 555M's average because the Quadro's many additional tests, particularly the Passmark DirectX entries, pull the average down.

The percentile rankings put the GT 555M at the 37th percentile among all GPUs, while the Quadro M4000 sits at the 32nd percentile. This is an interesting result. Despite the Quadro M4000's overwhelming win in the OpenCL head-to-head, its overall percentile is lower because the benchmark suite includes many tests where the Quadro's professional-oriented design does not excel. The GT 555M, with its single OpenCL result, lands in a slightly higher percentile. This does not mean the GT 555M is faster; it simply reflects the different benchmark profiles recorded for each card.

The nearest rivals for the GT 555M in the database include the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M with an average score of 6481 and a delta of 0.2%, the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile at 6476 with a delta of 0.3%, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M at 6513 with a delta of -0.3%, and the Intel UHD Graphics P750 at 6554 with a delta of -0.9%. These deltas are all within a single percentage point, indicating that the GT 555M's performance is tightly clustered with these other mobile and integrated solutions.

The Quadro M4000's nearest rivals tell a similar story of tight competition. The AMD Radeon R7 M440 has an average score of 5483 with a delta of -0.3%, the AMD Radeon 610M scores 5444 with a delta of 0.4%, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M scores 5501 with a delta of -0.6%, and the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 scores 5508 with a delta of -0.7%. Again, all deltas are under one percent, suggesting the Quadro M4000's average score is comparable to these other cards across the full benchmark suite.

The decisive takeaway from the head-to-head data is that the Quadro M4000 dominates in raw compute performance as measured by OpenCL, but the GT 555M holds its own in percentile ranking due to the limited number of benchmarks recorded for it. The single head-to-head result is the most reliable direct comparison available, and it favors the Quadro M4000 by a wide margin.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 scores 19118 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M scores 6493. The Quadro M4000 wins this test with a 66% advantage.

Q: How do their overall benchmark averages compare?

A: The GT 555M has an average benchmark score of 6493 from a single test. The Quadro M4000 has an average of 5467 across ten recorded tests. The Quadro's average is lower because it includes several Passmark tests with low scores, such as 26 in DirectX 12 and 33 in DirectX 10.

Q: What percentile does each GPU occupy among all GPUs?

A: The GT 555M is at the 37th percentile, and the Quadro M4000 is at the 32nd percentile. The GT 555M ranks slightly higher despite losing the head-to-head benchmark.

Q: What are the closest rivals to the GT 555M in the database?

A: The nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M with a 0.2% delta, the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile with a 0.3% delta, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M with a -0.3% delta, and the Intel UHD Graphics P750 with a -0.9% delta.

Q: What are the closest rivals to the Quadro M4000 in the database?

A: The nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 M440 with a -0.3% delta, the AMD Radeon 610M with a 0.4% delta, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M with a -0.6% delta, and the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 with a -0.7% delta.

Q: How many benchmark wins does each GPU have in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The Quadro M4000 has 1 win in the recorded head-to-head benchmarks, and the GT 555M has 0 wins.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on entirely different architectures. The GT 555M uses the GF106 chip, which is based on the Fermi architecture. The Quadro M4000 uses the GM204 chip, based on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. This architectural gap spans multiple generations of NVIDIA design. Fermi was an early architecture in NVIDIA's lineup, while Maxwell 2.0 represented a significant evolution in efficiency and feature support.

The manufacturing process also differs considerably. The GT 555M is fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC, while the Quadro M4000 is fabricated on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. The smaller process node allowed the Quadro M4000 to pack far more transistors into its die. The GT 555M contains 1,170 million transistors on a die size of 238 mm², giving it a transistor density of 4.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The Quadro M4000 contains 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 13.1 million per square millimeter. The Quadro M4000 has over four times the transistor count and nearly double the die area.

The DirectX support differs between the two products. The GT 555M supports DirectX 12 at the 11_0 feature level, while the Quadro M4000 supports DirectX 12 at the 12_1 feature level. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The Vulkan support also differs: the GT 555M has no recorded Vulkan API support, while the Quadro M4000 supports Vulkan 1.4.

The production status for both is end-of-life, but their release dates are separated by roughly four years. The GT 555M was released in July 2011, and the Quadro M4000 was released in June 2015. The GT 555M belongs to the GeForce 500M generation and has a predecessor in the GeForce 400M series and a successor in the GeForce 600M series. The Quadro M4000 belongs to the Quadro Maxwell generation, with a Quadro Kepler predecessor and a Quadro Pascal successor.

Specification Differences

The memory subsystems of these two GPUs are dramatically different. The GT 555M has 1024 MB of DDR3 memory on a 128 bit bus, with a memory clock of 900 MHz and 1800 Mbps effective speed. This yields a bandwidth of 28.80 GB/s. The Quadro M4000 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256 bit bus, with a memory clock of 1502 MHz and 6 Gbps effective speed. This yields a bandwidth of 192.3 GB/s. The Quadro M4000 has eight times the memory capacity and nearly seven times the bandwidth.

The compute resources show a similar gap. The GT 555M has 144 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The Quadro M4000 has 1664 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Quadro M4000 has more than eleven times the shading units, over four times the TMUs, and four times the ROPs.

The fill rates and compute throughput follow the same pattern. The GT 555M has a pixel rate of 3.540 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 14.16 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 339.8 GFLOPS. The Quadro M4000 has a pixel rate of 49.47 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 80.39 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 2.573 TFLOPS. The Quadro M4000 is roughly fourteen times faster in pixel throughput, about five and a half times faster in texture throughput, and over seven times faster in FP32 compute.

The power and physical characteristics also differ. The GT 555M has a TDP of 35 W and uses a PCIe 2.0 x16 bus interface. Its display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, reflecting its mobile nature. The Quadro M4000 has a TDP of 120 W, is a single-slot card, requires one 6-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 300 W. It uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and has four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The Quadro M4000 measures 241 mm in length and 111 mm in height.

Where Each One Wins

The GT 555M wins in the category of power efficiency relative to its class. With a TDP of 35 W, it is designed for portable devices and consumes far less power than the Quadro M4000's 120 W. The GT 555M also holds a higher percentile ranking at 37 compared to the Quadro M4000's 32, though this is based on a very limited benchmark set.

The Quadro M4000 wins decisively in raw performance. It takes the only head-to-head benchmark victory, beating the GT 555M by 66% in Geekbench OpenCL. Its FP32 compute of 2.573 TFLOPS dwarfs the GT 555M's 339.8 GFLOPS. Its memory bandwidth of 192.3 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s gives it a massive advantage in memory-intensive workloads. The Quadro M4000 also offers much higher pixel and texture rates, making it better suited for high-resolution rendering and complex scenes.

The Quadro M4000 also wins on feature support. It has DirectX 12 at the 12_1 feature level, Vulkan 1.4 support, and a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. The GT 555M only reaches DirectX 12 at the 11_0 feature level, has no Vulkan support, and uses PCIe 2.0 x16.

For users who need a professional workstation card with substantial compute and memory resources, the Quadro M4000 is the clear choice based on the data. For users who need a low-power mobile GPU for a portable device, the GT 555M is the only option that fits that form factor, given its portable device dependent display outputs and 35 W power draw.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a straightforward conclusion for performance-focused buyers: the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 is the far more powerful GPU. Its 66% lead in the head-to-head OpenCL benchmark, combined with its 8 GB GDDR5 memory, 256 bit bus, and 2.573 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, places it in a different performance tier entirely. The Quadro M4000 is built for workstation tasks that demand high memory bandwidth and substantial compute throughput.

The GT 555M, however, serves a different purpose. Its 35 W TDP and mobile design make it suitable for notebooks and portable systems where the Quadro M4000's 120 W power requirement and single-slot form factor would be impossible to accommodate. The GT 555M's higher percentile ranking of 37 versus 32 should not be misinterpreted as a performance advantage; it reflects the limited benchmark data available for the GT 555M.

Buyers who prioritize raw performance, modern API support, and professional-grade memory capacity should select the Quadro M4000. Buyers who need a low-power GPU for a portable device and can accept significantly lower compute performance should consider the GT 555M. The data makes no case for choosing the GT 555M on performance grounds alone, but its power profile and mobile orientation give it a distinct use case in the database.