NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M and NVIDIA Quadro M4000 occupy the same 32nd percentile among all GPUs, yet their benchmark profiles could hardly be more different. The GTX 765M is a Kepler-based mobile part from 2013, while the Quadro M4000 is a Maxwell 2.0 workstation card from 2015. Their average benchmark scores are nearly identical—5501 for the GTX 765M versus 5467 for the Quadro M4000—but the head-to-head results reveal a stark performance separation in compute workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data shows a decisive victory for the Quadro M4000 in every direct comparison available. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro M4000 scores 19,118 against the GTX 765M’s 7,176. That is a 62.5% deficit for the older mobile chip, meaning the Quadro delivers roughly 2.7 times the raw compute throughput in this test. The margin is even larger in Geekbench Vulkan, where the Quadro M4000 posts 24,640 versus 6,714 for the GTX 765M—a 72.8% gap. The Quadro M4000’s advantage here approaches 3.7x, a massive swing that reflects both architectural maturity and a much larger silicon budget.

Interestingly, this dominance does not translate into a higher average benchmark score. The GTX 765M actually edges out the Quadro M4000 in overall average, 5501 to 5467, a difference of just 0.6%. That is because the GTX 765M’s average is bolstered by its Geekbench Metal score of 2,612, a test the Quadro M4000 does not appear in. The Quadro M4000’s average is dragged down by its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 113, DirectX 10 score of 33, DirectX 11 score of 49, and DirectX 12 score of 26—all legacy API tests where the newer card underperforms relative to its compute strengths. Its Passmark G3D score of 6,680 and Passmark GPU Compute score of 2,660 are far more competitive, but they cannot offset the low DirectX results in the averaging.

The head-to-head data records 2 wins for the Quadro M4000 and 0 for the GTX 765M. No benchmark in the shared set favors the mobile part. The deltaPct values in the nearestRivals list confirm the closeness: the GTX 765M is 0.6% ahead of the Quadro M4000 in average score, while the Quadro M4000 is 0.6% behind the GTX 765M from its own perspective. These are rounding-level differences that obscure the true performance disparity in modern workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro M4000 is the clear victor in any compute-oriented or modern graphics API scenario. Its Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores are multiples of the GTX 765M’s, indicating far superior raw throughput for tasks like rendering, simulation, or machine learning inference that leverage these APIs. The card’s Passmark G3D score of 6,680 also suggests strong DirectX 11 gaming performance, and its Passmark GPU Compute score of 2,660 shows healthy general-purpose compute capability. For a professional workstation, the Quadro M4000’s 8 GB of memory and 256-bit bus provide ample headroom for large datasets.

The GTX 765M’s wins are more modest and confined to a narrower set of conditions. Its Geekbench Metal score of 2,612 is its strongest single result, and it does not face the Quadro M4000 in that test. In the shared OpenCL and Vulkan benchmarks, the GTX 765M loses by wide margins, so there is no workload in the FACT PACK where it beats the Quadro M4000 directly. Its average benchmark score is slightly higher, but that is an artifact of the test mix rather than a genuine performance advantage. The GTX 765M also holds a small edge over the AMD Radeon R7 M440 (0.3% higher average) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (0.1% higher), but these are near-ties. The data suggests the GTX 765M is competitive with entry-level discrete GPUs of its era, but it is outclassed by the Quadro M4000 in every measurable compute task.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The GTX 765M uses the GK106 chip built on Kepler architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It packs 2,540 million transistors into a 221 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 11.5 million per square millimeter. The Quadro M4000, by contrast, uses the GM204 chip on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, also on TSMC’s 28 nm node, but with 5,200 million transistors spread across a 398 mm² die—a density of 13.1 million per square millimeter. The Quadro M4000 has more than double the transistor count and nearly double the die area, which explains its compute superiority.

The memory subsystems are radically different. The GTX 765M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.13 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro M4000 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 192.3 GB/s—three times the bandwidth. The Quadro M4000’s memory clock is 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) versus 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for the GTX 765M. This bandwidth advantage is critical for large textures and compute workloads.

Shader resources favor the Quadro M4000 overwhelmingly. It has 1,664 shading units, 104 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, versus 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs on the GTX 765M. The Quadro M4000’s pixel rate is 49.47 GPixel/s and texture rate is 80.39 GTexel/s, compared to 13.81 GPixel/s and 55.23 GTexel/s for the GTX 765M. FP32 performance is 2.573 TFLOPS for the Quadro M4000 versus 1,325.6 GFLOPS for the GTX 765M—nearly double.

The cards also differ in form factor and connectivity. The GTX 765M is an MXM Module with an MXM-B (3.0) interface, drawing 75 W with no power connectors, and its display outputs are portable-device dependent. The Quadro M4000 is a single-slot PCIe 3.0 x16 card, 241 mm long and 111 mm high, drawing 120 W with a single 6-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 300 W. It offers 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. API support also diverges: the GTX 765M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the Quadro M4000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro M4000’s newer DirectX 12 feature level and higher Vulkan version reflect its later release date of June 2015 versus May 2013 for the GTX 765M.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Quadro M4000 is the superior GPU for any workload that leverages modern compute APIs or requires substantial memory bandwidth. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 62.5% higher than the GTX 765M, and its Vulkan score is 72.8% higher. These are not marginal improvements—they are generational leaps. The Quadro M4000’s 8 GB memory, 192.3 GB/s bandwidth, and 2.573 TFLOPS FP32 performance make it suitable for professional 3D rendering, scientific computing, and other memory-intensive tasks. Its PCIe form factor and DisplayPort outputs fit a desktop workstation.

The GTX 765M, however, is not without a niche. It was designed for laptops, as its MXM module form factor and 75 W TDP indicate. For a mobile user in 2013, it offered capable gaming performance, as reflected in its Geekbench Metal score of 2,612 and its competitive average benchmark score of 5,501. It also consumes less power and requires no external power connector, making it far easier to integrate into a portable chassis. The GTX 765M’s nearest rivals—the GeForce MX130 (0.1% higher average) and Radeon R7 M440 (0.3% lower)—show it sits in a tight cluster of low-end mobile parts.

Choose the Quadro M4000 if you need raw compute power, large memory capacity, or modern API support. Choose the GTX 765M if you are constrained to a laptop form factor and prioritize power efficiency over absolute performance. The 0.6% average score difference is misleading; in every shared benchmark, the Quadro M4000 wins decisively. The GTX 765M’s only advantage is its Metal score, which is irrelevant to the Quadro M4000’s target audience.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M has an average benchmark score of 5,501, which is 0.6% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro M4000’s 5,467.

Q: How much faster is the Quadro M4000 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The Quadro M4000 scores 19,118 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 7,176 for the GTX 765M, a 62.5% advantage for the Quadro.

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

A: The Quadro M4000 has 192.3 GB/s of bandwidth from 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, while the GTX 765M has 64.13 GB/s from 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer DirectX version?

A: The Quadro M4000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 765M supports DirectX 12 (11_0).

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The GTX 765M has a 75 W TDP and no power connectors, while the Quadro M4000 has a 120 W TDP and requires a single 6-pin power connector with a suggested PSU of 300 W.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in transistor density?

A: The Quadro M4000 has a transistor density of 13.1 million per square millimeter on its 398 mm² die, versus 11.5 million per square millimeter on the GTX 765M’s 221 mm² die.