NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single recorded benchmark comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M and the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this measurement, the GTX 675M scored 6,946 points, while the Quadro K4000M scored 5,986 points. This gives the GTX 675M a decisive 16% lead over its workstation-oriented counterpart. The delta is substantial, indicating a clear performance advantage for the consumer GPU in this particular compute workload.

The GTX 675M's score places it at the 39th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Quadro K4000M sits at the 34th percentile. That five-percentage-point gap in percentile ranking reflects a meaningful separation in raw compute capability. The GTX 675M also wins the head-to-head comparison outright, with one win recorded versus zero for the Quadro K4000M.

Interestingly, the GTX 675M's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon R5 M240, which scores 6,975 points (a 0.4% difference), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M, which scores 7,023 points (a 1.1% difference). The NVIDIA T600 scores 7,035 points, placing it 1.3% ahead. On the other side, the AMD FirePro M5100 trails with 6,830 points, which is 1.7% behind the GTX 675M. This clustering indicates that the GTX 675M is competitive with a broad range of mid-range mobile GPUs, landing in a tight band where small differences separate the pack.

For the Quadro K4000M, the nearest rivals show a different pattern. The AMD FirePro W4100 scores 5,987 points, a negligible 0% difference. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 (desktop variant) scores 5,982 points, just 0.1% behind. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scores 5,996 points, a 0.2% difference, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M scores 6,000 points, also a 0.2% difference. The Quadro K4000M sits in a very tight cluster where all four rivals are within a fraction of a percent, suggesting that its performance level is highly representative of that segment.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for compute-heavy tasks: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M is the faster GPU. With a 16% higher OpenCL score, it delivers a measurable performance advantage that would be noticeable in any workload leveraging general-purpose GPU compute. The GTX 675M achieves 952.3 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the Quadro K4000M reaches 1,153.9 GFLOPS, yet the benchmark tells a different story. Despite the Quadro's higher theoretical floating-point capability, the GTX 675M wins the actual measured test. This suggests that real-world OpenCL performance depends on more than just raw FP32 numbers, including factors like driver optimization, memory subsystem efficiency, or workload characteristics.

For users deciding between these two, the GTX 675M is the choice when benchmark performance is the primary criterion. It wins the only recorded comparison and sits at a higher percentile ranking. The Quadro K4000M, however, comes with its own advantages that may matter for specific professional use cases, which the specification differences section will clarify. Neither GPU is current production hardware, as both are marked end-of-life, but the GTX 675M's superior measured performance makes it the stronger option based purely on the data.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA architecture generations. The GTX 675M uses the GF114 chip based on Fermi 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The Quadro K4000M uses the GK104 chip based on Kepler architecture, also from TSMC but on a more advanced 28 nm node. This node difference is significant: the Quadro packs 3,540 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, while the GTX 675M contains 1,950 million transistors on a larger 332 mm² die. The transistor density tells the story clearly: the Quadro achieves 12.0 million transistors per square millimeter, while the GTX 675M manages only 5.9 million per square millimeter. That is roughly double the density for the Kepler part, a direct consequence of the newer manufacturing process.

The shading unit count also diverges sharply. The Quadro K4000M has 960 shading units, while the GTX 675M has 384. The texture mapping units differ as well: 80 for the Quadro versus 64 for the GTX 675M. Both GPUs have 32 raster operation units, so pixel throughput is closer. The Quadro's pixel rate is 12.02 GPixel/s, while the GTX 675M achieves 9.92 GPixel/s. Texture rate follows a similar pattern: 48.08 GTexel/s for the Quadro versus 39.68 GTexel/s for the GTX 675M. Despite these architectural advantages for the Quadro, the OpenCL benchmark still favors the GTX 675M, which underscores how clock speeds and memory characteristics can influence real-world results.

The memory subsystems differ in capacity but not in bus width. Both use a 256-bit bus, but the GTX 675M has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory running at an effective 3 Gbps, yielding 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro K4000M has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory running at an effective 2.8 Gbps, yielding 89.60 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 675M therefore has higher memory bandwidth despite having half the capacity, which may contribute to its OpenCL performance advantage. The Quadro's clock behavior is also notable: its base and boost clocks are both fixed at 601 MHz, whereas the GTX 675M has no listed base or boost clock in the database, only its memory clock of 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M scores 6,946 points, which is 16% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M's 5,986 points.

Q: Are these GPUs from the same architecture generation?

A: No. The GTX 675M uses Fermi 2.0 architecture with the GF114 chip, while the Quadro K4000M uses Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip.

Q: Which GPU has more memory and how does that affect bandwidth?

A: The Quadro K4000M has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, double the GTX 675M's 2 GB. However, the GTX 675M has higher bandwidth at 96.00 GB/s versus 89.60 GB/s for the Quadro, due to its faster effective memory clock of 3 Gbps versus 2.8 Gbps.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two?

A: The Quadro K4000M has a transistor density of 12.0 million per square millimeter, while the GTX 675M has 5.9 million per square millimeter.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The Quadro K4000M additionally supports Vulkan 1.2.175, while the GTX 675M has no listed Vulkan support.

Q: What are the TDP values for these GPUs?

A: Both GPUs have a TDP of 100 W and use the MXM Module slot width with no power connectors required.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 675M wins the only measurable category: the OpenCL benchmark. With a 16% lead over the Quadro K4000M, it is the stronger choice for any application that relies on OpenCL compute acceleration. This could include tasks like video encoding, physics simulations, or general-purpose GPU computing where the OpenCL path is the primary workload. Its higher memory bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s, despite the smaller 2 GB capacity, likely contributes to this advantage. The GTX 675M also sits at a higher percentile ranking (39th versus 34th), indicating it performs better relative to the entire GPU landscape.

The Quadro K4000M has no benchmark wins, but it offers advantages in other areas that the data records. It has double the memory capacity at 4 GB, which could be beneficial for workloads that require larger datasets to be held in VRAM, even if the bandwidth is lower. Its higher FP32 throughput of 1,153.9 GFLOPS versus 952.3 GFLOPS suggests theoretical compute superiority, even though the measured OpenCL result contradicts that. The Quadro also has more shading units (960 versus 384) and more texture mapping units (80 versus 64), which could matter in geometry-heavy or texture-bound scenarios that the OpenCL test does not capture. The Vulkan 1.2.175 support on the Quadro, absent on the GTX 675M, may also be relevant for newer applications that leverage Vulkan compute.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every architectural specification. The GTX 675M uses the GF114 chip on Fermi 2.0 architecture, while the Quadro K4000M uses the GK104 chip on Kepler architecture. The manufacturing process differs: 40 nm for the GTX 675M versus 28 nm for the Quadro. Transistor counts are 1,950 million versus 3,540 million, and die sizes are 332 mm² versus 294 mm², leading to transistor densities of 5.9M per mm² for the GTX 675M and 12.0M per mm² for the Quadro.

The clock specifications show the GTX 675M has no listed base or boost clock, while the Quadro has both fixed at 601 MHz. Memory clocks differ: 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective) for the GTX 675M versus 700 MHz (2.8 Gbps effective) for the Quadro. Memory capacity differs at 2 GB versus 4 GB, though both use GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus. Bandwidth favors the GTX 675M at 96.00 GB/s versus 89.60 GB/s. Shading units are 384 versus 960, TMUs are 64 versus 80, and ROPs are identical at 32. Pixel rates are 9.92 GPixel/s for the GTX 675M and 12.02 GPixel/s for the Quadro. Texture rates are 39.68 GTexel/s versus 48.08 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 952.3 GFLOPS for the GTX 675M and 1,153.9 GFLOPS for the Quadro.

Both GPUs share a 100 W TDP, MXM Module slot width, no power connectors, and MXM-B (3.0) bus interface. Display outputs are portable device dependent for both. The API support differs only in Vulkan: the Quadro supports 1.2.175, while the GTX 675M has no listed Vulkan support. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The GTX 675M belongs to the GeForce 600M generation and was released on 2012-03-21, while the Quadro K4000M belongs to the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx000M) generation and was released on 2012-05-31. The GTX 675M's predecessor is GeForce 500M and its successor is GeForce 700M. The Quadro K4000M's predecessor is Quadro Fermi-M and its successor is Quadro Maxwell-M. Both are end-of-life products.