NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains one direct comparison between these two mobile GPUs, and the result is a clear, though modest, victory for the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Quadro K4000M scores 5,986 points against the GeForce GTX 760M's 5,604 points. That is a 6.8% advantage for the Quadro part, a meaningful gap in compute workloads but not a dominant one.

Context from the nearest rivals list helps frame this result. The Quadro K4000M sits at the 34th percentile of all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 5,986. Its closest competitor is the AMD FirePro W4100, which averages 5,987 (a 0% delta), putting the two effectively at parity. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000, the desktop variant, averages 5,982, just 0.1% behind. Even the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M are within 0.2% of the K4000M's score, with 5,996 and 6,000 respectively. This clustering indicates that the K4000M's single recorded score is highly representative of a broader performance plateau; it is neither an outlier nor a weak sample.

The GeForce GTX 760M, by contrast, holds the 31st percentile overall. Its average benchmark score of 5,236 is pulled down by a second recorded test, Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 4,868. The OpenCL score of 5,604 is the stronger of the two. The nearest rivals for the GTX 760M include the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M at 5,211 (0.5% ahead of the 760M), the AMD Radeon R7 M260X at 5,161 (1.5% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce 940M at 5,284 (0.9% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M at 5,308 (1.3% behind). These deltas show the GTX 760M's average is bracketed by older and newer mobile parts, all within a narrow band of roughly 2.5%. The K4000M, with only one benchmark, does not have a comparable second data point in the database.

The head-to-head delta of 6.8% is therefore the single most important quantitative fact. It exceeds every delta between the K4000M and its own nearest rivals, which are all under 0.2%. It also exceeds the gaps between the GTX 760M and its nearest rivals, which cap at 1.5%. In other words, the difference between these two specific GPUs is larger than the differences that separate each from its closest alternatives in the database. The K4000M wins the only direct comparison, and it wins by a margin that is statistically robust relative to the noise in the surrounding data.

The Verdict

The data points to the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M as the superior part in raw compute performance. Its OpenCL score of 5,986 beats the GTX 760M's 5,604 by 6.8%, and its percentile ranking of 34 versus 31 reflects that edge. For any workload that relies on OpenCL compute, the K4000M is the clear pick from these two.

However, the verdict is not unanimous across all dimensions. The GTX 760M does have a second benchmark result in the database, a Vulkan score of 4,868, which the K4000M cannot match because no Vulkan result is recorded for it. This means the GTX 760M demonstrates broader API coverage in the recorded data, even though its average score is lower. Users who require Vulkan compute specifically have a verified data point for the GTX 760M, whereas the K4000M's Vulkan capability is unmeasured.

The power envelope also favors the GTX 760M. The K4000M has a TDP of 100 W, while the GTX 760M draws 55 W. That is a substantial difference for mobile platforms, where thermal and battery constraints are critical. The K4000M wins on performance, but it consumes nearly twice the power budget. The GTX 760M is the more efficient choice for systems where power draw is the limiting factor.

The production status for both is end-of-life, so neither is a future-proof investment. The release dates differ: the K4000M launched on May 31, 2012, and the GTX 760M on May 29, 2013. The newer part, the GTX 760M, belongs to the GeForce 700M generation, while the K4000M is part of the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx000M) generation. For compute-centric tasks, the older Quadro wins. For power-sensitive mobile builds, the newer GeForce is the rational choice. The database does not record a single test where the GTX 760M beats the K4000M, so the performance verdict is unambiguous.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on NVIDIA's Kepler architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process node. The K4000M uses the GK104 chip, while the GTX 760M uses the GK106S chip. The GK104 is the larger die at 294 mm², containing 3,540 million transistors, which works out to a transistor density of 12.0 million per mm². The GK106S is smaller at 221 mm², with 2,540 million transistors and a density of 11.5 million per mm². The K4000M's chip is therefore physically larger and denser, which explains its higher compute throughput.

The shading unit counts reflect this hierarchy. The K4000M has 960 shading units, 80 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster output units (ROPs). The GTX 760M has 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The K4000M leads in every parallel execution resource category. The pixel rate is 12.02 GPixel/s for the K4000M versus 11.50 GPixel/s for the GTX 760M, and the texture rate is 48.08 GTexel/s versus 46.02 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute rating is 1,153.9 GFLOPS for the K4000M against 1,104.4 GFLOPS for the GTX 760M. Every measured throughput metric favors the Quadro.

Neither GPU has RT cores or tensor cores, which is consistent with their Kepler generation and their end-of-life status. The API support is identical: DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175 for both. The memory subsystem differs substantially, and that is covered in the specification section. The bus interface also differs: the K4000M uses MXM-B (3.0), while the GTX 760M uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Both are MXM modules in slot width, and both have no power connectors, relying instead on the motherboard or carrier board for power delivery.

Specification Differences

The memory configuration is the most striking specification divergence. The K4000M has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 89.60 GB/s. The GTX 760M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 64.13 GB/s. The K4000M offers double the capacity and 39.6% more bandwidth. The memory clock is 700 MHz (2.8 Gbps effective) for the K4000M, versus 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for the GTX 760M. The GTX 760M's memory runs faster per pin, but the K4000M's wider bus wins overall.

The GPU clocks also differ. The K4000M has a base clock of 601 MHz and a boost clock of 601 MHz, meaning it does not boost at all. The GTX 760M has a base clock of 628 MHz and a boost clock of 719 MHz. The GTX 760M runs at higher frequencies, which partially compensates for its smaller execution core, but not enough to overcome the K4000M's resource advantage in the OpenCL test.

The TDP difference is significant: 100 W for the K4000M versus 55 W for the GTX 760M. The GTX 760M is the more power-efficient design, delivering 1,104.4 GFLOPS at 55 W, while the K4000M delivers 1,153.9 GFLOPS at 100 W. The efficiency ratio favors the GTX 760M. The display outputs are portable device dependent for both, meaning the laptop manufacturer decides the physical ports. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M scores 5,986 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M scores 5,604. The K4000M is 6.8% faster in this test.

Q: Does the GTX 760M have any benchmark advantage over the K4000M?

A: The GTX 760M has a recorded Geekbench Vulkan score of 4,868, which is a test the K4000M does not have in the database. The K4000M has no recorded Vulkan result, so the GTX 760M is the only one of the two with a verified Vulkan data point.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The Quadro K4000M has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The GeForce GTX 760M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The K4000M has a TDP of 100 W. The GTX 760M has a TDP of 55 W. The GTX 760M draws nearly half the power of the K4000M.

Q: Are both GPUs based on the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use NVIDIA's Kepler architecture on a 28 nm TSMC process. The K4000M uses the GK104 chip, and the GTX 760M uses the GK106S chip.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The K4000M has a memory bandwidth of 89.60 GB/s. The GTX 760M has 64.13 GB/s. The K4000M's 256-bit bus provides 39.6% more bandwidth than the GTX 760M's 128-bit bus.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro K4000M wins in every directly measured compute benchmark. Its OpenCL score of 5,986 is 6.8% higher than the GTX 760M's 5,604. It also wins on memory capacity (4 GB versus 2 GB), memory bandwidth (89.60 GB/s versus 64.13 GB/s), shading units (960 versus 768), texture units (80 versus 64), and ROPs (32 versus 16). Its FP32 compute rating of 1,153.9 GFLOPS exceeds the GTX 760M's 1,104.4 GFLOPS. The pixel rate and texture rate are also higher. For any compute-heavy task, especially OpenCL workloads, the K4000M is the stronger choice. Its 34th percentile ranking versus the GTX 760M's 31st percentile confirms this in relative terms.

The GeForce GTX 760M wins on power efficiency and clock speed. Its TDP of 55 W is less than half the K4000M's 100 W, making it the better fit for thin-and-light laptops or systems with limited thermal headroom. Its base clock of 628 MHz and boost clock of 719 MHz are higher than the K4000M's fixed 601 MHz. It also has a recorded Vulkan benchmark score of 4,868, which gives it a verified capability in that API. For users who prioritize battery life, lower heat output, or Vulkan compute, the GTX 760M is the rational pick.

The release timing also splits the use cases. The K4000M launched on May 31, 2012, and the GTX 760M on May 29, 2013. The GTX 760M is the newer part by roughly one year, belonging to the GeForce 700M generation with the GeForce 600M as its predecessor. The K4000M belongs to the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx000M) generation, succeeding the Quadro Fermi-M. Neither has a successor in active production, but the GTX 760M's lineage continues through the GeForce 800M, while the K4000M's leads to the Quadro Maxwell-M.

In summary, the K4000M is the compute leader with a 6.8% OpenCL advantage, superior memory subsystem, and larger execution core. The GTX 760M is the efficiency leader with a 45 W lower TDP, higher clocks, and a Vulkan data point. The database records zero benchmark wins for the GTX 760M against the K4000M, so performance-focused users should choose the Quadro. Power-focused users should choose the GeForce.