NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4100M Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4100M

The database places the GeForce GTX 960 and the Quadro K4100M in adjacent performance tiers, though the two cards approach the workload from very different angles. The GTX 960 is a consumer Turing-era (Maxwell 2.0) part built on the GM206 chip at TSMC's 28 nm node, with 2.94 billion transistors on a 228 mm² die. The Quadro K4100M is the professional Kepler-generation mobile workstation card, based on the GK104 chip with 3.54 billion transistors on a 294 mm² die. The rivalry here is not just about core counts; it is about how each card uses its memory, shading hardware, and clock strategy to win different test types.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows the GeForce GTX 960 winning both head-to-head tests. In the geekbench_metal test, the GTX 960 scores 8773 against the Quadro's 6662, a 31.7% advantage. That is a massive lead in a compute-heavy workload, but the opencl test tells the more interesting story. The GTX 960 scores 18925 versus 9149 for the K4100M, a delta of 106.9%. That is more than double the score, and it shows that the Maxwell architecture scales much better in GPGPU-style workloads than the Kepler part. The average benchmark score across all tests lands the GTX 960 at 9273, with the Quadro K4100M at 7906. The GTX 960 wins two, loses none.

The percentile data places the GTX 960 at the 45th percentile across all GPUs in the database, while the Quadro K4100M sits at the 41st. The nearest rivals for the GTX 960 are a mixed group: the GTX 465 is only 0.2% slower, the GTX 850M is 0.3% slower, and the R7 M380 is 0.4% slower. On the Quadro side, the P5000 is 1.7% faster, the GTX 880M is 1.7% faster, and the GTX 650 Ti is 1.8% faster. These are close calls, meaning the GTX 960 is at parity with a wide range of mid-range parts, and the Quadro K4100M is similarly placed among its peers.

Architecture Differences

The core architectural split is clear. The GTX 960 uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, with 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Quadro K4100M uses the older Kepler architecture, but it has more hardware: 1152 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Quadro also has a wider memory bus. The GTX 960 comes with 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro doubles the bus width to 256-bit and packs 4 GB of GDDR5, giving it 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. Interestingly, the Quadro's memory clock runs at 800 MHz, which is higher than the GTX's 1753 MHz effective rate, but the GTX's narrower bus means it has more bandwidth per byte of memory.

Clock speeds favor the GeForce. The GTX 960 runs at a base of 1127 MHz with a 1178 MHz boost. The Quadro K4100M locks at 706 MHz for both base and boost, a massive difference in peak frequency. The Maxwell chip also has a higher pixel rate: 37.70 GPixel/s vs 16.94 GPixel/s, and a texture fill rate of 75.39 GTexel/s vs 67.78 GTexel/s. In FP32 compute, the GTX 960 is rated at 2.413 TFLOPS, while the Quadro is at 1.627 TFLOPS. The transistor density is also on the GeForce's side: 12.9 million per mm² versus 12.0 million per mm².

The process node is the same (28 nm, TSMC), but the die is very different. The GM206 is a 228 mm² die with 2.94 billion transistors; the GK104 is a 294 mm² die with 3.54 billion. This is the fundamental difference: the Quadro has more silicon area and more transistors, but it uses them at lower clocks and with older architecture, while the GTX 960 gets more work done per clock with fewer resources.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 960 is the clear winner in compute-heavy tests. The geekbench_metal score of 8773 versus 6662 is the 31.7% lead; the geekbench_opencl score of 18925 versus 9149 is the 106.9% lead. For any workload that scales well with shading units and raw FP32 compute, Maxwell is the better part. That includes gaming, rendering, and OpenCL-style compute tasks.

The Quadro K4100M wins where its larger memory bus and capacity matter. With 4 GB of VRAM and 256-bit bus, it can hold larger textures and geometry batches than the 2 GB, 128-bit GTX 960. The K4100M also runs cooler at 100 W TDP versus 120 W, and it does not need a separate power connector: it is an MXM module. The GTX 960, by contrast, requires a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 300 W PSU. The Quadro is also a mobile workstation part, while the GTX is a desktop card. The K4100M's Kepler architecture brings 32 ROPs and 96 TMUs, which helps in fill-rate limited scenarios.

In API support, the GTX 960 lists DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro lists DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.175. The GeForce is the modern part here, and the Quadro is an older one with a different API feature set.

The Verdict

From the data alone, pick the GeForce GTX 960 if your work is dominated by FP32 compute, OpenCL, or gaming. The 106.9% OpenCL lead is too large to ignore. Pick the Quadro K4100M only if you specifically need 4 GB of memory, a 256-bit bus, or a low-power MXM module for a mobile chassis. The Quadro has no wins in the head-to-head tests. The record says that the GTX 960 wins 2, loses 0. That is the verdict.

FAQ

Q: What is the biggest difference between the two in raw compute?

A: The GTX 960 produces 2.413 TFLOPS FP32 while the Quadro K4100M produces 1.627 TFLOPS. The GTX is about 48% higher in FP32 performance. In geekbench_metal, the GTX scores 8773 vs 6662, a 31.7% lead.

Q: Which has more memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 960 has 112.2 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. The Quadro has 102.4 GB/s over a 256-bit bus. The Quadro has more total capacity (4 GB vs 2 GB), but the GTX has more bandwidth.

Q: Are they close in the database's percentile?

A: The GTX 960 is at the 45th percentile of all GPUs. The K4100M is at the 41st percentile. Both are mid-pack cards.

Q: Which one needs a bigger power supply?

A: The GTX 960 requires a 300 W PSU and one 6-pin connector. The K4100M is an MXM module with no separate power connector. The GTX has a higher TDP at 120 W vs the Quadro's 100 W.

Q: What API levels do they support?

A: The GTX supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.175.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 | NVIDIA Quadro K4100M |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | GM206 | GK104 |

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Kepler |

| Process | 28 nm (TSMC) | 28 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 2,940 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 228 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.9M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1127 MHz | 706 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz | 706 MHz |

| Memory | 2 GB GDDR5 | 4 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 112.2 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 1152 |

| TMUs | 64 | 96 |

| ROPs | 32 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 37.70 GPixel/s | 16.94 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 75.39 GTexel/s | 67.78 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.413 TFLOPS | 1.627 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 120 W | 100 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | None (MXM) |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | N/A |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 | Portable Device Dependent |

| Release Date | 2015-01-21 | 2013-07-22 |

| Launch MSRP | 199 USD | 1,499 USD |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |