NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M represent two distinctly different eras and market segments within NVIDIA’s lineup, despite sharing a 28 nm manufacturing process from TSMC. The data shows a decisive performance gulf between the professional workstation card and the older mobile gaming GPU, with the Quadro M4000 winning both available head-to-head benchmark comparisons by substantial margins. However, each card occupies a specific niche defined by its architectural heritage, power envelope, and intended workload, making the choice between them less about raw performance and more about the specific requirements of the user’s system and application environment.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results available for direct comparison are limited to two tests: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both instances, the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 demonstrates a commanding lead over the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M, reflecting its newer architecture, higher transistor count, and substantially larger memory subsystem.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, which measures general-purpose compute performance across a variety of workloads, the Quadro M4000 scores 19,118 points against the GTX 760M’s 5,604 points. This represents a delta of 241.1% in favor of the Quadro M4000, meaning the workstation card delivers more than three times the compute throughput of the mobile GPU. The scale of this difference is stark, and it is consistent with the underlying hardware specifications: the Quadro M4000 features 1,664 shading units compared to 768 on the GTX 760M, and its FP32 compute rating of 2.573 TFLOPS dwarfs the GTX 760M’s 1,104.4 GFLOPS.

The Vulkan API test shows an even more pronounced disparity. Here, the Quadro M4000 achieves a score of 24,640, while the GTX 760M manages only 4,868. The delta expands to 406.2%, indicating that the Quadro M4000 is roughly five times faster in this low-level graphics and compute API. This result is particularly telling because Vulkan is designed to reduce CPU overhead and provide more direct hardware access, which favors the more modern Maxwell 2.0 architecture of the Quadro M4000 over the older Kepler design in the GTX 760M.

The overall win tally is 2-0 in favor of the Quadro M4000. There are no benchmark tests in the data where the GTX 760M emerges victorious. The average benchmark scores reinforce this narrative: the Quadro M4000 averages 5,467 points across its full benchmark suite, placing it at the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 760M averages 5,236 points, placing it at the 31st percentile. Interestingly, despite the massive per-test advantages, the average scores are relatively close because the Quadro M4000’s benchmark suite includes older DirectX 9, 10, and 11 tests where it scores much lower (33, 49, and 113 points respectively in PassMark tests), while the GTX 760M only has data for the two Geekbench tests.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 5,467 points compared to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M’s 5,236 points. The Quadro M4000 sits at the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 760M sits at the 31st percentile.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in Vulkan performance?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the Quadro M4000 scores 24,640 points, which is 406.2% higher than the GTX 760M’s score of 4,868 points. This indicates that the Quadro M4000 is approximately five times faster in Vulkan workloads.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two cards?

A: The Quadro M4000 offers a memory bandwidth of 192.3 GB/s, which is exactly three times the 64.13 GB/s provided by the GTX 760M. The Quadro M4000 also has a 256-bit memory bus compared to the GTX 760M’s 128-bit bus, and it comes with 8 GB of GDDR5 memory versus 2 GB on the GTX 760M.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor count?

A: The Quadro M4000 contains 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, while the GTX 760M has 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die. This means the Quadro M4000 has more than double the transistor count of the GTX 760M.

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the GTX 760M outperforms the Quadro M4000?

A: No. In the two available head-to-head benchmark tests (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the Quadro M4000 wins both. The GTX 760M records zero wins in the head-to-head comparison data.

Q: How does the pixel fill rate compare between the two cards?

A: The Quadro M4000 achieves a pixel rate of 49.47 GPixel/s, which is over four times higher than the GTX 760M’s 11.50 GPixel/s. Similarly, the texture rate of the Quadro M4000 is 80.39 GTexel/s, versus 46.02 GTexel/s for the GTX 760M.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous regarding raw performance: the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 is the superior GPU in every measured benchmark. With a 241.1% advantage in OpenCL and a 406.2% advantage in Vulkan, the Quadro M4000 is in a completely different performance class. Its 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, 256-bit bus, and 192.3 GB/s bandwidth provide a memory subsystem that is capable of handling far larger datasets and higher resolutions than the GTX 760M’s 2 GB configuration with a 128-bit bus and 64.13 GB/s bandwidth.

The Quadro M4000 is also the more future-proof choice from a software standpoint. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 760M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The newer Maxwell 2.0 architecture also brings architectural improvements over the Kepler design, including higher transistor density (13.1M / mm² vs 11.5M / mm²) and a more modern feature set.

However, the GTX 760M is not without its merits. Its 55 W TDP is less than half of the Quadro M4000’s 120 W, making it suitable for portable devices where power consumption and thermals are critical constraints. The GTX 760M uses an MXM Module form factor with no power connectors, whereas the Quadro M4000 requires a single 6-pin connector and a 300 W power supply. For users with a laptop or compact system that cannot accommodate a full-length 241 mm card, the GTX 760M is the only viable option despite its lower performance.

The choice between these two GPUs should be driven by the target platform and workload. For desktop workstation tasks involving large datasets, compute-heavy applications, or multi-display setups (the Quadro M4000 supports four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs), the Quadro M4000 is the clear choice. For mobile gaming or portable professional use where power efficiency and physical size are paramount, the GTX 760M remains functional, though users should expect significantly lower compute and graphics performance.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The Quadro M4000 uses the GM204 chip with Maxwell 2.0 architecture, while the GTX 760M uses the GK106S chip with Kepler architecture. The process node is identical at 28 nm from TSMC, but the transistor counts diverge sharply: 5,200 million on the Quadro M4000 versus 2,540 million on the GTX 760M. The die sizes are 398 mm² and 221 mm², respectively, giving the Quadro M4000 a higher transistor density of 13.1M per mm² compared to 11.5M per mm².

Clock speeds also differ. The GTX 760M has defined base and boost clocks of 628 MHz and 719 MHz, while the Quadro M4000 has no listed base or boost clock in the data. The memory clock on the Quadro M4000 is 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective), compared to 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective) on the GTX 760M. Memory specifications heavily favor the Quadro M4000: 8 GB versus 2 GB, 256-bit versus 128-bit bus, and 192.3 GB/s versus 64.13 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources show a clear hierarchy. The Quadro M4000 has 1,664 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while the GTX 760M has 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. The pixel rate is 49.47 GPixel/s versus 11.50 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 80.39 GTexel/s versus 46.02 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 2.573 TFLOPS versus 1,104.4 GFLOPS.

Power and physical specifications differ significantly. The Quadro M4000 draws 120 W and is a single-slot card measuring 241 mm in length, requiring a single 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested power supply. The GTX 760M draws only 55 W, uses an MXM Module form factor, requires no power connectors, and has no listed dimensions. Display outputs also differ: the Quadro M4000 offers four DisplayPort 1.2 connectors, while the GTX 760M's outputs are described as "Portable Device Dependent."

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial, reflecting a generational leap within NVIDIA's lineup. The Quadro M4000 is built on Maxwell 2.0, which introduced significant improvements in power efficiency, geometry processing, and memory compression over its predecessor. The GTX 760M, in contrast, uses the older Kepler architecture, which was designed with a focus on raw compute throughput but lacks several of Maxwell's optimizations.

The shading unit count difference (1,664 vs 768) is a direct consequence of the die size and transistor budget. The Quadro M4000's 5,200 million transistors allow for a much larger execution resource pool, resulting in more than double the FP32 throughput. The ROP count is particularly divergent: 64 on the Quadro M4000 versus 16 on the GTX 760M. This fourfold difference in ROPs directly explains the pixel rate gap (49.47 GPixel/s vs 11.50 GPixel/s) and has significant implications for fill-rate-bound workloads such as high-resolution rendering with heavy anti-aliasing.

The memory architecture is another fundamental difference. The Quadro M4000's 256-bit memory bus and 8 GB capacity provide four times the memory of the GTX 760M and triple the bandwidth. This is critical for professional applications that handle large textures, complex 3D models, or GPU-accelerated compute datasets that exceed the 2 GB limit of the GTX 760M.

API support reflects the architectural maturity. The Quadro M4000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 760M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6, but the higher feature level of the Quadro M4000's DirectX 12 implementation and newer Vulkan version indicate better compatibility with modern graphics APIs.

The generations also differ in their product lineage. The Quadro M4000 belongs to the Quadro Maxwell (Mx000) generation, succeeding Quadro Kepler and preceding Quadro Pascal. The GTX 760M is part of the GeForce 700M series, succeeding GeForce 600M and preceding GeForce 800M. The release dates are separated by roughly two years, with the GTX 760M launching in 2013 and the Quadro M4000 in 2015. Both products are now end-of-life, but the architectural advantages of the Quadro M4000 remain evident in the benchmark data.