NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly between the two NVIDIA Kepler parts, and in both compute workloads the Quadro K4000 comes out ahead. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro K4000 scores 6816 against 5604 for the GeForce GTX 760M, a 21.6% advantage. The gap widens substantially in Geekbench Vulkan, where the Quadro K4000 reaches 6964 while the GTX 760M manages 4868, a 43.1% lead. That is not a narrow margin; the Vulkan result places the Quadro K4000 nearly half again as fast as the mobile part in that specific API workload.

The GeForce GTX 760M does not win either of the two head-to-head tests in the database. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 5236, versus 5982 for the Quadro K4000, a difference of about 14%. The percentile placement reinforces the split: the Quadro K4000 sits at the 34th percentile among all GPUs, while the GTX 760M sits at the 31st. In percentile terms, that is a modest separation, but the per-test deltas show where the real distance lies. The OpenCL gap of 1212 points and the Vulkan gap of 2096 points are both larger than the average score difference would suggest, meaning the Quadro K4000 is particularly strong in those specific compute paths.

For use-case planning, the data indicates the Quadro K4000 is the better choice for OpenCL and Vulkan compute workloads. The GTX 760M, as a mobile part, has no recorded test where it surpasses the Quadro K4000. The closest comparison in the rival data for the GTX 760M is the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M, which scores 5211, a 0.5% delta in favor of the GTX 760M. That is a near tie, and it shows the GTX 760M is competitive with older mobile Quadro parts, but it does not close the gap to the desktop Quadro K4000.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the GK106 and GK106S chips respectively, use the Kepler architecture, and are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The transistor count is identical at 2,540 million, and the die size matches at 221 mm², yielding the same transistor density of 11.5M per mm². The shading unit count is also identical at 768, and both parts have 64 texture mapping units. The first divergence appears in the render output units: the Quadro K4000 has 24 ROPs, while the GTX 760M has 16. That difference directly affects pixel throughput, and the recorded pixel rates show it: 12.96 GPixel/s for the Quadro K4000 versus 11.50 GPixel/s for the GTX 760M.

Memory subsystems differ as well. The Quadro K4000 carries 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 192 bit bus, producing 134.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 760M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus, yielding 64.13 GB/s. That is a 70.4 GB/s gap in raw memory bandwidth, more than double the mobile part's figure. The memory clock also differs: the Quadro K4000 runs at 1404 MHz with 5.6 Gbps effective, while the GTX 760M runs at 1002 MHz with 4 Gbps effective. The Quadro K4000 also has a higher texture rate at 51.84 GTexel/s versus 46.02 GTexel/s, and higher FP32 throughput at 1,244.2 GFLOPS versus 1,104.4 GFLOPS.

The GTX 760M does have a clock advantage in one respect: it lists a base clock of 628 MHz and a boost clock of 719 MHz, while the Quadro K4000 has no base or boost clock listed. However, the Quadro K4000 still achieves higher compute and memory throughput in the recorded benchmarks. The GTX 760M is a mobile MXM module with no power connectors and a 55 W TDP, while the Quadro K4000 is a single-slot desktop card with one 6-pin connector and an 80 W TDP. The GTX 760M uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Quadro K4000 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. Display outputs also differ: the Quadro K4000 offers 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2, while the GTX 760M is described as portable device dependent.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 has an average benchmark score of 5982, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M has an average score of 5236.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The Quadro K4000 scores 6964 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the GTX 760M scores 4868. That is a 43.1% difference in favor of the Quadro K4000.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same architecture?

A: Yes, both are Kepler architecture parts from NVIDIA, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process, with 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Quadro K4000 has a memory bandwidth of 134.8 GB/s, while the GTX 760M has 64.13 GB/s. The Quadro K4000 also has a larger 3 GB frame buffer on a 192 bit bus, versus 2 GB on a 128 bit bus for the GTX 760M.

Q: Which GPU has more render output units?

A: The Quadro K4000 has 24 ROPs, while the GTX 760M has 16. This contributes to the Quadro K4000's higher pixel rate of 12.96 GPixel/s versus 11.50 GPixel/s.

Q: How does the GTX 760M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 760M is 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M, 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce 940M, 1.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, and 1.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M260X.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in several recorded fields. The Quadro K4000 uses the GK106 chip, while the GTX 760M uses the GK106S. The Quadro K4000 belongs to the Quadro Kepler (Kx000) generation, while the GTX 760M belongs to the GeForce 700M generation. The Quadro K4000 has no listed base or boost clock, while the GTX 760M has a base clock of 628 MHz and a boost clock of 719 MHz. Memory size differs: 3 GB for the Quadro K4000 versus 2 GB for the GTX 760M. Bus width is 192 bit versus 128 bit. Memory bandwidth is 134.8 GB/s versus 64.13 GB/s. The memory clock is 1404 MHz with 5.6 Gbps effective for the Quadro K4000, versus 1002 MHz with 4 Gbps effective for the GTX 760M.

ROP count is 24 versus 16. Pixel rate is 12.96 GPixel/s versus 11.50 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 51.84 GTexel/s versus 46.02 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,244.2 GFLOPS versus 1,104.4 GFLOPS. TDP is 80 W versus 55 W. Slot width is single-slot versus MXM module. Power connectors are 1x 6-pin for the Quadro K4000, while the GTX 760M has none. The suggested PSU is 250 W for the Quadro K4000, with no value listed for the GTX 760M. Bus interface is PCIe 2.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 for the Quadro K4000, versus portable device dependent for the GTX 760M. Dimensions are recorded only for the Quadro K4000: 241 mm length and 111 mm height. Release dates differ: the Quadro K4000 launched on 2013-02-28, while the GTX 760M launched on 2013-05-29. The Quadro K4000 has a launch MSRP of 1,269 USD, while the GTX 760M has no launch MSRP recorded. The Quadro K4000's predecessor is Quadro Fermi and its successor is Quadro Maxwell; the GTX 760M's predecessor is GeForce 600M and its successor is GeForce 800M. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct head-to-head comparisons between these GPUs, and both go to the Quadro K4000. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro K4000 scores 6816 against the GTX 760M's 5604. That is a 1212 point difference, or 21.6%. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Quadro K4000 scores 6964 against 4868, a difference of 2096 points, or 43.1%. The Vulkan result is the more decisive of the two, showing that the Quadro K4000's advantage grows when the workload shifts to a lower-level API.

The average benchmark scores tell a similar story. The Quadro K4000 averages 5982 across its recorded tests, while the GTX 760M averages 5236. The Quadro K4000's nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M, scores 5986, a 0.1% delta in favor of the K4000M. The AMD FirePro W4100 scores 5987, also 0.1% ahead of the Quadro K4000. The AMD Radeon HD 8750M scores 5970, which is 0.2% behind the Quadro K4000. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scores 5996, 0.2% ahead. These deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, placing the Quadro K4000 in a tight cluster of similarly performing GPUs.

For the GTX 760M, the nearest rivals are a different group. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M scores 5211, which is 0.5% behind the GTX 760M. The NVIDIA GeForce 940M scores 5284, 0.9% ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M scores 5308, 1.3% ahead. The AMD Radeon R7 M260X scores 5161, 1.5% behind. The GTX 760M sits near the middle of this group, slightly ahead of two rivals and slightly behind two others. The Quadro K4000, by contrast, is at the low end of its rival cluster, with three of its four nearest rivals scoring marginally higher. Despite that, the Quadro K4000 maintains a clear edge over the GTX 760M in both direct comparisons.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward choice for compute-oriented workloads. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 wins both recorded head-to-head benchmarks, with a 21.6% lead in OpenCL and a 43.1% lead in Vulkan. Its higher ROP count, wider memory bus, and larger frame buffer all support the measured performance gap. The Quadro K4000 also has a higher average benchmark score at 5982 versus 5236, and it sits at the 34th percentile among all GPUs, three points above the GTX 760M's 31st percentile.

The GeForce GTX 760M is not without merits. It has a lower TDP at 55 W versus 80 W, uses PCIe 3.0 x16, and is designed for mobile platforms with no external power connectors. For a portable system, those characteristics matter. But in the recorded benchmark data, the GTX 760M does not outperform the Quadro K4000 in any test. Its nearest rival comparisons show it within 1.5% of several other mobile and older GPUs, but none of those rivals close the gap to the Quadro K4000.

Users who need OpenCL or Vulkan compute performance should select the Quadro K4000 based on the recorded measurements. Users constrained to a mobile form factor with lower power draw will find the GTX 760M the only viable option in this pairing, but they should expect lower compute throughput in both tested APIs. The Quadro K4000's launch MSRP is 1,269 USD. The GTX 760M has no launch MSRP recorded. The production status for both is end-of-life, so availability will be limited to the used or remaining stock market. The verdict from the data is clear: the Quadro K4000 is the faster GPU in every recorded benchmark, and the GTX 760M is the lower-power mobile alternative.