NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000 Comparison

The Verdict

The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M occupy entirely different tiers of the GPU landscape, separated by roughly four years of architectural evolution and designed for disparate workloads. The data in the database shows a single head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, where the Quadro M4000 delivers a score of 19,118 against the GTX 560M’s 4,855, a 293.8% advantage. That gap is not incremental; it is generational.

For users seeking professional compute, OpenGL-accelerated design work, or multi-display output, the Quadro M4000 is the clear choice. Its 8 GB GDDR5 memory, 256-bit bus, and Maxwell 2.0 architecture provide the resources needed for large datasets and higher resolutions. The GTX 560M, with 1,536 MB of memory and a 192-bit bus, belongs to a mobile era where power constraints dominated design priorities.

For anyone operating a laptop from the early 2010s, the GTX 560M remains a functional but dated part. Its 75 W TDP and MXM module form factor make it suitable only for legacy portable systems. The database records its production status as end-of-life, as it is for the Quadro M4000, but the GTX 560M’s performance percentile of 28 versus the Quadro’s 32 indicates it sits below the professional card in overall standing among all GPUs.

The decision is straightforward: the Quadro M4000 for workstation tasks, the GTX 560M only if constrained to its original laptop chassis. No benchmark in the database shows the GTX 560M winning any test against the Quadro M4000. The wins tally is 1 for the Quadro, 0 for the GTX.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable measurement in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The Quadro M4000 scores 19,118, while the GTX 560M scores 4,855. This represents a delta of 293.8%, meaning the Quadro achieves nearly four times the compute throughput in this OpenCL workload. Such a margin reflects not just clock speeds but the fundamental differences in shader count, memory bandwidth, and architecture efficiency.

The Quadro M4000’s shading units number 1,664, compared to the GTX 560M’s 192. That is an 8.67x difference in raw shader hardware, though real-world scaling is never linear. The texture units tell a similar story: 104 versus 32, a 3.25x gap. Raster operations units (ROPs) are 64 versus 24, a 2.67x difference. Memory bandwidth amplifies the gap further: 192.3 GB/s versus 60.00 GB/s, a 3.2x advantage for the Quadro.

Pixel rate for the Quadro M4000 is 49.47 GPixel/s, compared to 6.200 GPixel/s for the GTX 560M. That is a 7.98x difference in fill rate. Texture rate is 80.39 GTexel/s versus 24.80 GTexel/s, a 3.24x gap. FP32 compute is 2.573 TFLOPS versus 595.2 GFLOPS, a 4.32x difference. Every metric in the database favors the Quadro M4000 by a wide margin.

The GTX 560M’s nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX with an average score of 4,844 and a delta of 0.2%, and the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX at 4,867 with a delta of -0.2%. This shows the GTX 560M sits squarely in the low-end mobile segment of its era. The Quadro M4000’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 M440 at 5,483 with a delta of -0.3% and the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 at 5,508 with a delta of -0.7%. Interestingly, the Quadro M4000’s average benchmark score of 5,467 places it among integrated and entry-level discrete GPUs in the database, which reflects the heavy weighting of its specific test suite.

Architecture Differences

The Quadro M4000 is built on the GM204 chip using the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 5,200 million transistors on a die size of 398 mm², yielding a transistor density of 13.1 million per mm². Maxwell 2.0 introduced improvements in power efficiency and geometry processing over its predecessors, and the database records support for DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The GTX 560M uses the GF116 chip with the Fermi 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. It has 1,170 million transistors on a die size of 238 mm², giving a transistor density of 4.9 million per mm². Fermi 2.0 was designed for the 500M series and brought tessellation improvements, but it predates Vulkan support entirely. The database lists its DirectX support as 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan entry.

The process node difference, 28 nm versus 40 nm, explains part of the efficiency gap. The Quadro M4000 packs over four times the transistor count into a die that is only 1.67x larger, thanks to the denser manufacturing process. This allows for more compute units, more memory interfaces, and higher bandwidth within a similar physical footprint.

Architecturally, Maxwell 2.0 divides work into larger blocks with better scheduling, whereas Fermi 2.0 relies on a more traditional fixed-function pipeline. The Quadro’s support for DirectX 12_1 includes features like conservative rasterization and rasterizer-ordered views, which are absent from the GTX 560M’s 11_0 feature level. For professional applications that leverage these modern APIs, the Quadro is the only viable option.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show clear divergence across every measurable field.

Memory: The Quadro M4000 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 192.3 GB/s. The GTX 560M has 1,536 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 60.00 GB/s. Memory clock is 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for the Quadro versus 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective) for the GTX.

Compute units: Shading units are 1,664 for the Quadro versus 192 for the GTX. TMUs are 104 versus 32. ROPs are 64 versus 24.

Fill rates: Pixel rate is 49.47 GPixel/s versus 6.200 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 80.39 GTexel/s versus 24.80 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 2.573 TFLOPS versus 595.2 GFLOPS.

Power and form factor: The Quadro M4000 has a TDP of 120 W, is single-slot, requires a single 6-pin power connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU. The GTX 560M has a TDP of 75 W, comes as an MXM Module, has no power connectors, and lists no suggested PSU. The Quadro uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the GTX uses MXM-B (3.0).

Display outputs: The Quadro provides 4x DisplayPort 1.2. The GTX 560M’s outputs are listed as portable device dependent, meaning they vary by laptop implementation.

Dimensions: The Quadro M4000 is 241 mm long (9.5 inches) and 111 mm tall (4.4 inches). The GTX 560M has no recorded dimensions, consistent with its modular mobile nature.

Release timeline: The Quadro M4000 was released on 2015-06-28, while the GTX 560M came out on 2011-05-29. The Quadro’s predecessor is Quadro Kepler, its successor is Quadro Pascal. The GTX 560M’s predecessor is GeForce 400M, its successor is GeForce 600M.

API support: The Quadro supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 560M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan.

Benchmark suite: The Quadro M4000 has ten recorded benchmarks spanning 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, and multiple Passmark tests. The GTX 560M has only one recorded benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL. This disparity limits direct comparison but does not change the outcome of the available test.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The Quadro M4000 delivers 2.573 TFLOPS, while the GTX 560M delivers 595.2 GFLOPS. The Quadro is 4.32x faster in this metric.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Quadro M4000 has 192.3 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, compared to the GTX 560M’s 60.00 GB/s over a 192-bit bus. That is a 3.2x advantage for the Quadro.

Q: Does the GTX 560M support Vulkan?

A: No. The database records no Vulkan support for the GTX 560M. The Quadro M4000 supports Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Quadro M4000 has a 120 W TDP and requires a 6-pin power connector, with a suggested 300 W PSU. The GTX 560M has a 75 W TDP and requires no power connectors.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The Quadro M4000 has 1,664 shading units. The GTX 560M has 192. The Quadro has 8.67x more shading units.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The Quadro M4000 has an average benchmark score of 5,467. The GTX 560M has an average benchmark score of 4,855. The Quadro sits at the 32nd percentile among all GPUs, while the GTX 560M sits at the 28th percentile.

Q: When was each card released?

A: The Quadro M4000 was released on 2015-06-28. The GTX 560M was released on 2011-05-29. Both are end-of-life.