NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti vs NVIDIA Quadro 4000M Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded benchmark data places the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti and NVIDIA Quadro 4000M in adjacent performance tiers, with the GTX 550 Ti holding a measurable edge in the single available OpenCL test. The GTX 550 Ti scores 5731 points, which is 10% higher than the Quadro 4000M's 5211 points. In percentile terms, the GTX 550 Ti sits at the 33rd percentile among all GPUs, while the Quadro 4000M sits at the 30th percentile. This is a narrow gap, but it is consistent across the only head-to-head measurement recorded.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in OpenCL workloads, the GTX 550 Ti is the clear choice. Its shading unit count is higher in raw FLOPs terms (691.2 GFLOPS vs 638.4 GFLOPS), and it delivers a higher pixel rate (7.200 GPixel/s vs 6.650 GPixel/s) and texture rate (28.80 GTexel/s vs 26.60 GTexel/s). The GTX 550 Ti wins the only benchmark where both are measured, and it does so by a 10% margin.

However, the Quadro 4000M is not without merit. It carries twice the memory capacity (2 GB vs 1 GB), a wider 256-bit memory bus versus 192-bit, and a higher transistor count (1,950 million vs 1,170 million) on a larger die (332 mm² vs 238 mm²). It also draws less power (100 W vs 116 W) and uses an MXM module form factor, which is designed for mobile workstations. Users who need more memory capacity for large datasets or who require a mobile form factor should consider the Quadro 4000M despite its lower benchmark score.

The data does not support a universal recommendation. For desktop users with fixed power budgets and a focus on OpenCL compute, the GTX 550 Ti is the stronger performer. For mobile workstation users who need 2 GB of VRAM and a lower thermal envelope, the Quadro 4000M is the appropriate pick.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 550 Ti wins in every measured performance category from the head-to-head data. The only recorded benchmark, geekbench_opencl, shows a 5731 to 5211 result in favor of the GTX 550 Ti, a 10% advantage. This win is backed by higher theoretical throughput rates: the GTX 550 Ti achieves 691.2 GFLOPS of FP32 compute versus 638.4 GFLOPS for the Quadro 4000M, a difference of roughly 8%. Its pixel fill rate is 7.200 GPixel/s versus 6.650 GPixel/s, and its texture fill rate is 28.80 GTexel/s versus 26.60 GTexel/s.

The Quadro 4000M does not win any benchmark in the database. However, it wins in capacity and efficiency categories. It offers 2 GB of GDDR5 memory versus 1 GB on the GTX 550 Ti, which is a decisive advantage for workloads that exceed 1 GB of working set. Its 256-bit memory bus provides 80.00 GB/s of bandwidth, which is lower than the GTX 550 Ti's 98.50 GB/s despite the wider bus, due to a lower memory clock (625 MHz vs 1026 MHz). The Quadro 4000M also has a lower TDP (100 W vs 116 W), making it more suitable for thermally constrained environments.

In practical terms, the GTX 550 Ti is the compute winner, the Quadro 4000M is the capacity and mobility winner. Neither card excels in the same scenarios, so the choice depends on whether raw compute speed or memory capacity matters more.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on NVIDIA's Fermi architecture, but they use different chips and generations. The GTX 550 Ti uses the GF116 chip with the "Fermi 2.0" architecture label, while the Quadro 4000M uses the GF104 chip with the base "Fermi" architecture label. Both are manufactured on TSMC's 40 nm process, but the die sizes differ substantially: the GF116 measures 238 mm² with 1,170 million transistors, while the GF104 measures 332 mm² with 1,950 million transistors. The transistor density is higher on the GF104 (5.9M / mm² vs 4.9M / mm²), reflecting its larger and more complex design.

The shading unit counts tell a notable story. The Quadro 4000M has 336 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, versus the GTX 550 Ti's 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the GTX 550 Ti achieves higher FP32 throughput (691.2 GFLOPS vs 638.4 GFLOPS) because of its higher clock speeds. The GTX 550 Ti's memory runs at 1026 MHz (4.1 Gbps effective) on a 192-bit bus, yielding 98.50 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro 4000M's memory runs at 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective) on a 256-bit bus, yielding 80.00 GB/s. The GTX 550 Ti's narrower bus is compensated by a much higher memory clock.

Form factor is another key difference. The GTX 550 Ti is a dual-slot desktop card with a 210 mm length, requiring a 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU. The Quadro 4000M is an MXM module with no power connectors, designed for portable devices, and its display outputs are portable-device dependent. The GTX 550 Ti offers 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a outputs, while the Quadro 4000M relies on the host laptop's display outputs.

Both cards share the same API support: DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan support. Neither has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The GTX 550 Ti is from the GeForce 500 generation, succeeding GeForce 400 and succeeded by GeForce 600. The Quadro 4000M is from the Quadro Fermi-M generation (x000M), succeeding Quadro FX Mobile and succeeded by Quadro Kepler-M.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher OpenCL performance?

A: The GTX 550 Ti scores 5731 in geekbench_opencl, which is 10% higher than the Quadro 4000M's 5211. The GTX 550 Ti wins the only head-to-head benchmark recorded.

Q: Does the Quadro 4000M have more memory?

A: Yes. The Quadro 4000M has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the GTX 550 Ti has 1 GB. This is a significant difference for workloads that require large memory footprints.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 550 Ti has higher memory bandwidth at 98.50 GB/s, despite a narrower 192-bit bus. The Quadro 4000M has a 256-bit bus but only achieves 80.00 GB/s due to a lower memory clock (625 MHz vs 1026 MHz).

Q: Are these cards suitable for the same systems?

A: No. The GTX 550 Ti is a dual-slot desktop card requiring a 6-pin power connector and a 300 W PSU. The Quadro 4000M is an MXM module with no power connectors, designed for portable devices. They are not interchangeable.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor count?

A: The Quadro 4000M has 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, compared to the GTX 550 Ti's 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die. The Quadro 4000M also has a higher transistor density (5.9M / mm² vs 4.9M / mm²).

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Quadro 4000M has a TDP of 100 W, while the GTX 550 Ti has a TDP of 116 W. The Quadro 4000M is more power-efficient in this regard.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded head-to-head benchmark is geekbench_opencl. The GTX 550 Ti achieves a score of 5731, while the Quadro 4000M scores 5211. The delta is 10% in favor of the GTX 550 Ti. This is a substantial margin in the context of these two cards, especially given that their percentile rankings are close (33rd vs 30th).

To contextualize the GTX 550 Ti's score, its nearest rivals in the database include the GeForce GTX 670MX at 5721 (0.2% behind), the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 at 5712 (0.3% behind), and the AMD Radeon HD 8790M at 5691 (0.7% behind). The AMD Radeon R7 M465 is slightly ahead at 5841, which is 1.9% higher than the GTX 550 Ti. This places the GTX 550 Ti in a tightly packed cluster of mid-range GPUs from the same era.

The Quadro 4000M's nearest rivals are similarly close. The GeForce GTX 760M scores 5236, which is 0.5% higher than the Quadro 4000M. The AMD Radeon R7 M260X scores 5161, which is 1% lower. The Quadro K3100M scores 5154, which is 1.1% lower. The GeForce 940M scores 5284, which is 1.4% higher. The Quadro 4000M sits in a comparable cluster, but at a slightly lower absolute level than the GTX 550 Ti.

The 10% delta between the two cards is larger than any of the deltas within their respective rival clusters. This suggests that the GTX 550 Ti and Quadro 4000M occupy different performance tiers, even though their architecture lineage is similar. The GTX 550 Ti's advantage comes primarily from its higher clock speeds: its memory runs at 1026 MHz versus 625 MHz, and its FP32 output is 691.2 GFLOPS versus 638.4 GFLOPS. The Quadro 4000M's higher shading unit count (336 vs 192) is not enough to overcome the clock disadvantage in this OpenCL workload.

In texture and pixel throughput, the GTX 550 Ti also leads: 28.80 GTexel/s vs 26.60 GTexel/s, and 7.200 GPixel/s vs 6.650 GPixel/s. The Quadro 4000M's only capacity advantage is its 2 GB memory, which does not appear in the OpenCL score. The data shows a consistent pattern: the GTX 550 Ti is faster in every measured compute metric, while the Quadro 4000M offers more memory and a lower TDP. For OpenCL-focused tasks, the GTX 550 Ti is the better performer by a clear margin.