NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000M Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti are both end-of-life graphics cards from different professional and consumer lineages, but benchmark data places them in a surprisingly close contest. In the sole head-to-head benchmark available, the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Quadro K4000M scores 5986, which is 4.4% ahead of the GTX 550 Ti’s 5731. This slim margin, however, belies significant architectural and feature differences that dictate which card is more suitable for specific tasks. The data shows a clear split: the Quadro K4000M is built for compute density and larger workloads, while the GTX 550 Ti offers a more conventional desktop footprint with a slightly higher memory bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results indicate a narrow victory for the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M in raw compute performance, but the win distribution across other characteristics is more nuanced. The Quadro K4000M wins the only direct benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a score of 5986 against the GTX 550 Ti’s 5731. This 4.4% advantage suggests the Quadro is better suited for OpenCL-accelerated compute tasks, which aligns with its professional positioning.

The GTX 550 Ti, despite losing the compute benchmark, holds an edge in memory bandwidth. Its memory clock runs at 1026 MHz (4.1 Gbps effective), and with a 192-bit bus, it achieves 98.50 GB/s of bandwidth. In contrast, the Quadro K4000M’s memory runs at 700 MHz (2.8 Gbps effective) on a 256-bit bus, yielding 89.60 GB/s. This means the GTX 550 Ti can move data faster, which can benefit certain texture-heavy or bandwidth-bound workloads, even if its raw shader compute is lower.

For pixel and texture processing, the Quadro K4000M is decisively ahead. It delivers a pixel rate of 12.02 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 48.08 GTexel/s, compared to the GTX 550 Ti’s 7.200 GPixel/s and 28.80 GTexel/s. This makes the Quadro significantly better at fill-rate-limited operations, such as high-resolution rendering or multi-sampled anti-aliasing. The Quadro also has more shading units (960 vs 192), more texture mapping units (80 vs 32), and more ROPs (32 vs 24), which contributes to its higher FP32 performance of 1,153.9 GFLOPS versus the GTX 550 Ti’s 691.2 GFLOPS.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Quadro K4000M uses the GK104 chip on the Kepler architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This process allows for a transistor density of 12.0M / mm², packing 3,540 million transistors into a 294 mm² die. In contrast, the GTX 550 Ti uses the GF116 chip on the Fermi 2.0 architecture, built on a larger 40 nm process. This older process yields a transistor density of just 4.9M / mm², with 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die. The Kepler architecture is newer and more efficient per transistor, which is reflected in the Quadro’s lower TDP of 100 W despite having roughly three times the shading units.

Memory configurations also differ substantially. The Quadro K4000M comes with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the GTX 550 Ti has only 1024 MB. The Quadro’s memory bus is wider at 256 bit, but its effective memory speed is lower, resulting in the bandwidth deficit noted earlier. The GTX 550 Ti, with its 192-bit bus and faster memory clock, compensates with higher peak bandwidth. This suggests the Quadro is designed for larger datasets and frame buffers, while the GTX 550 Ti prioritizes raw throughput.

The form factors and interface are major differentiators. The Quadro K4000M is an MXM Module with an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, designed for laptops and mobile workstations. It has no power connectors and relies on the motherboard’s power delivery. The GTX 550 Ti is a dual-slot desktop card with a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, requiring a single 6-pin power connector and a suggested 300 W power supply. Its length is 210 mm (8.3 inches), and its display outputs are 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a. The Quadro’s display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its mobile nature.

API support shows both cards at DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The Quadro K4000M supports Vulkan 1.2.175, while the GTX 550 Ti has no Vulkan support listed. This gives the Quadro a modern API advantage for current compute and rendering workloads.

The Verdict

The data clearly indicates that the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M is the superior card for compute-intensive and professional tasks. Its 4.4% lead in Geekbench OpenCL, combined with over 2.5x the FP32 performance (1,153.9 GFLOPS vs 691.2 GFLOPS) and 4 GB of memory, makes it the choice for workloads that demand high precision and large datasets. The Quadro’s 34th percentile ranking among all GPUs, versus the GTX 550 Ti’s 33rd, reinforces its slight overall advantage.

However, the GTX 550 Ti is not without merit. Its higher memory bandwidth (98.50 GB/s vs 89.60 GB/s) and lower transistor count suggest it can be more efficient in specific bandwidth-limited scenarios. Its desktop form factor with a 6-pin power connector and 300 W suggested PSU makes it easier to integrate into a standard PC build, whereas the Quadro K4000M requires an MXM slot, which is rare outside of mobile workstations.

For a user building a legacy desktop system and needing a simple drop-in card, the GTX 550 Ti is the more practical option. For a user with an MXM-based mobile workstation seeking maximum compute performance and memory capacity, the Quadro K4000M is the clear winner. The benchmark data cannot justify choosing the GTX 550 Ti on raw performance grounds, but its form factor and bandwidth profile give it a niche.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M scores 5986, which is 4.4% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti’s 5731.

Q: Does the GTX 550 Ti have more memory bandwidth?

A: Yes, the GTX 550 Ti achieves 98.50 GB/s, while the Quadro K4000M achieves 89.60 GB/s, despite the Quadro having a wider 256-bit bus versus the GTX's 192-bit bus.

Q: What is the difference in shading units?

A: The Quadro K4000M has 960 shading units, while the GTX 550 Ti has 192. This contributes to the Quadro’s much higher FP32 performance of 1,153.9 GFLOPS versus 691.2 GFLOPS.

Q: Which card supports Vulkan?

A: The Quadro K4000M supports Vulkan 1.2.175. The GTX 550 Ti has no Vulkan support listed.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Quadro K4000M has a 100 W TDP and no power connectors, as it is an MXM module. The GTX 550 Ti has a 116 W TDP, requires a single 6-pin power connector, and has a suggested 300 W power supply.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No, both are listed as end-of-life. The Quadro K4000M was released on 2012-05-31, and the GTX 550 Ti was released on 2011-03-14.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this test, the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M scores 5986, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti scores 5731. The Quadro wins by a delta of 4.4%. This is a modest victory, but it is consistent with the Quadro’s higher theoretical compute metrics.

Looking at the underlying specifications, the Quadro’s win in OpenCL is driven by its massive advantage in shading units (960 vs 192) and FP32 throughput (1,153.9 GFLOPS vs 691.2 GFLOPS). The Quadro’s texture rate of 48.08 GTexel/s is also 67% higher than the GTX 550 Ti’s 28.80 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate of 12.02 GPixel/s is 67% higher than 7.200 GPixel/s. These raw throughput advantages make the Quadro the stronger compute card.

However, the GTX 550 Ti fights back in memory bandwidth. Its 98.50 GB/s is 10% higher than the Quadro’s 89.60 GB/s. This means that in workloads that are highly dependent on memory access patterns, the GTX 550 Ti could theoretically close the gap, even if it cannot match the Quadro’s shader compute. The benchmark result of a 4.4% difference suggests that the OpenCL test is not purely bandwidth-bound, favoring the Quadro’s compute density.

In terms of competitive positioning, the Quadro K4000M’s nearest rival is the AMD FirePro W4100, which scores 5987, a 0% deltaPct. This indicates the Quadro is right in line with its direct competitor. The GTX 550 Ti’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX, scoring 5721, a 0.2% deltaPct. The GTX 550 Ti is also only 0.3% ahead of the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300, showing its modest standing. The Quadro’s 34th percentile versus the GTX's 33rd percentile confirms that the Quadro is marginally better positioned in the overall GPU landscape, even though both are in the bottom half of all GPUs.