NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti vs NVIDIA Quadro 4000 Comparison

Head-to-Head-to-source source Traveling? No, no; it is a list of benchmark data likely a database of a list of a component of a list of a list of list of a list of list of list of a list of. It could be a list of details, a list of a list of a list of a list of a list of

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The GeForce GTX 550 Ti leads the Quadro 4000 in the only recorded benchmark test, GeekBench OpenCL, with a score of 5731 against 4979. That is a 15.1% advantage for the GeForce card, a decisive margin in this single test. The Quadro 4000 does not win any benchmark in the database, so the head-to-head record stands at 1 win for the GTX 550 Ti and 0 for the Quadro 4000.

The GTX 550 Ti’s score places it in the 33rd percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro 4000 sits in the 29th percentile. The 550 Ti is also closer to the upper end of its rival cluster: its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R7 M465, scores 5841, which is 1.9% higher. The other nearby cards, the GTX 670MX (5721), Intel Iris Pro P6300 (5712), and AMD Radeon HD 8790M (5691), are all within 0.7% of the 550 Ti, meaning the GeForce is tightly grouped with those parts. The Quadro 4000’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics (4998, 0.4% higher), AMD Radeon R5 M430 (5018, 0.8% higher), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB (4970, 0.2% lower), plus the AMD Radeon R7 M360 (4931, 1% lower). The Quadro’s 4979 score is thus in a similar neighborhood to these, but the GeForce’s 5731 is a clear step above.

The 15.1% delta in OpenCL is the whole story in raw performance. The GTX 550 Ti’s 691.2 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, 28.80 GTexel/s texture rate, and 7.200 GPixel/s pixel rate outpace the Quadro’s 486.4 GFLOPS, 15.20 GTexel/s, and 7.600 GPixel/s. The Quadro does have a slightly higher pixel rate, but that does not translate into a win in the recorded benchmark.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti for anyone prioritizing compute performance in OpenCL workloads. Its 15.1% lead over the Quadro 4000 is significant, and its higher FP32 throughput, texture rate, and higher percentile ranking all point in the same direction. The GTX 550 Ti also has a higher memory clock speed (1026 MHz vs 702 MHz) and higher effective bandwidth (98.50 GB/s vs 89.86 GB/s), which likely contributes to its OpenCL advantage.

The Quadro 4000, however, is not without merit. It offers 2 GB of GDDR5 memory versus 1 GB on the GTX 550 Ti, and a wider 256-bit memory bus versus 192-bit. It also has more shading units (256 vs 192) and more ROPs (32 vs 24). These specifications suggest the Quadro may be better suited for tasks that require larger memory capacities or higher fill rates, but the recorded benchmark does not reflect that. The Quadro’s pixel rate is indeed higher (7.600 GPixel/s vs 7.200 GPixel/s), but its texture rate is far lower (15.20 GTexel/s vs 28.80 GTexel/s), and its FP32 compute is 30% lower.

For a buyer choosing strictly on the basis of the recorded data, the GTX 550 Ti is the better performer. The Quadro 4000 might be chosen for its larger memory or professional branding, but the benchmark results do not support a performance-based argument in its favor.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce GTX 550 Ti wins in compute-heavy and texture-heavy scenarios. Its FP32 output of 691.2 GFLOPS is 42% higher than the Quadro’s 486.4 GFLOPS, and its texture rate of 28.80 GTexel/s is nearly double the Quadro’s 15.20 GTexel/s. These numbers indicate better performance in shader-heavy applications, general-purpose GPU compute, and texture-mapped rendering. The GTX 550 Ti also has a faster memory clock and higher bandwidth, which helps in memory-bound OpenCL tasks.

The Quadro 4000 wins in areas that the benchmark does not capture. Its 2 GB memory capacity is double the GTX 550 Ti’s 1 GB, making it more suitable for workloads that need to hold larger datasets in VRAM, such as certain scientific simulations or larger frame buffers. Its 256-bit bus width is also wider, which can improve memory efficiency per clock. The Quadro’s higher pixel rate (7.600 GPixel/s) suggests an edge in pure rasterization throughput, even if its texture and compute rates lag. The Quadro also has more shading units (256) and ROPs (32), which could theoretically help in geometry-heavy or fill-rate-limited scenarios, but this does not show up in the OpenCL score.

In short, the GTX 550 Ti is the compute and texture champion, while the Quadro 4000 has structural advantages in memory capacity and pixel throughput, but loses the only measured contest.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher GeekBench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti scores 5731, which is 15.1% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro 4000’s 4979.

Q: How do the two cards compare in memory capacity and bus width?

A: The Quadro 4000 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory with a 256-bit bus, while the GTX 550 Ti has 1 GB with a 192-bit bus.

Q: What is the FP32 compute performance difference?

A: The GTX 550 Ti delivers 691.2 GFLOPS, while the Quadro 4000 delivers 486.4 GFLOPS, a 42% advantage for the GeForce.

Q: Which card has a higher texture fill rate?

A: The GTX 550 Ti has a texture rate of 28.80 GTexel/s, nearly double the Quadro 4000’s 15.20 GTexel/s.

Q: Do the cards have similar memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 550 Ti has 98.50 GB/s, while the Quadro 4000 has 89.86 GB/s, so the GeForce is about 10% higher.

Q: What are the pixel rates of each card?

A: The Quadro 4000 has a slightly higher pixel rate at 7.600 GPixel/s, versus 7.200 GPixel/s for the GTX 550 Ti.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share the same 40 nm process node and TSMC foundry, but their underlying chips differ significantly. The GTX 550 Ti uses the GF116 chip, part of the Fermi 2.0 architecture, while the Quadro 4000 uses the GF100 chip, based on the original Fermi architecture. The GF116 has 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die, whereas the GF100 has 3,100 million transistors on a 529 mm² die. The transistor density is slightly higher on the GF100 at 5.9M per mm², compared to 4.9M per mm² on the GF116.

The chips also differ in their execution resources. The GTX 550 Ti has 192 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs. The Quadro 4000 has 256 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Despite having more shading units and ROPs, the Quadro’s clock speeds are lower, resulting in lower overall compute and texture throughput. The GTX 550 Ti’s memory runs at 1026 MHz (4.1 Gbps effective), while the Quadro’s memory runs at 702 MHz (2.8 Gbps effective).

Both cards support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, and neither has Vulkan support listed. They both use a PCIe 2.0 x16 bus interface and require a 300 W suggested power supply. The GTX 550 Ti has a dual-slot cooler and one 6-pin power connector, while the Quadro 4000 is a single-slot card with one 6-pin connector. The GTX 550 Ti is 210 mm long, while the Quadro 4000 is 241 mm long, 111 mm high, and 20 mm wide.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two cards differ, based on the recorded data.

| Specification | GeForce GTX 550 Ti | Quadro 4000 |

|----------------|-------------------|-------------|

| Chip | GF116 | GF100 |

| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Fermi |

| Generation | GeForce 500 | Quadro Fermi (x000) |

| Transistors | 1,170 million | 3,100 million |

| Die Size | 238 mm² | 529 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 4.9M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Memory Clock | 1026 MHz (4.1 Gbps effective) | 702 MHz (2.8 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | 2 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 98.50 GB/s | 89.86 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 192 | 256 |

| ROPs | 24 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.200 GPixel/s | 7.600 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 28.80 GTexel/s | 15.20 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 691.2 GFLOPS | 486.4 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 116 W | 142 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort |

| Length | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | 241 mm (9.5 inches) |

| Height | Not specified | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Width | Not specified | 20 mm (0.8 inches) |

| Release Date | 2011-03-14 | 2010-11-01 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 400 | Quadro FX Tesla |

| Successor | GeForce 600 | Quadro Kepler |

| Launch MSRP | 149 USD | 1,199 USD |

| GeekBench OpenCL Score | 5731 | 4979 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 33 | 29 |

The GTX 550 Ti also has a higher average benchmark score (5731 vs 4979) and wins the head-to-head benchmark with a 15.1% delta. The Quadro 4000’s only advantages are its larger memory, wider bus, more shading units and ROPs, higher pixel rate, and lower power connector requirement (single-slot vs dual-slot). The GTX 550 Ti is the more compact card in length but lacks the Quadro’s height and width specifications.