NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000M Comparison

# NVIDIA Quadro M4000M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070

The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 occupy very different positions in the GPU landscape, separated by five years of architecture evolution. The M4000M, a Maxwell-era professional mobile part from 2015, delivers an average benchmark score of 20,480, while the RTX 3070, an Ampere desktop card from 2020, posts an average of 17,208. The RTX 3070 wins both recorded head-to-head benchmarks, yet the M4000M holds a higher percentile ranking at 65 versus the RTX 3070's 61. This contradiction stems from the benchmark sets used: the M4000M's scores come from Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan only, while the RTX 3070's average includes a broader mix of DirectX and compute tests that drag its mean downward.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3070 dominates in raw compute throughput and modern API performance. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 112,821 against the M4000M's 19,989, an 82.3% advantage. This is the largest single-test gap in the comparison and reflects the RTX 3070's 20.31 TFLOPS FP32 throughput versus the M4000M's 2.593 TFLOPS. The RTX 3070 also edges ahead in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 21,022 versus 20,971, a slim 0.2% margin that shows the M4000M can still compete in Vulkan workloads despite its age.

The M4000M's strength lies in consistency across its limited benchmark profile. Its two Geekbench scores, 19,989 and 20,971, are tightly clustered, indicating stable performance across different API workloads. Its 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs suggests that in the specific tests it runs, it outperforms most of the field. The RTX 3070's 61st percentile, while lower, comes from a much larger and more varied test suite including Passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests, where it shows a wide spread from 85 in DirectX 12 to 247 in DirectX 9. The M4000M has no recorded wins in the head-to-head tests, but its Vulkan score nearly matches the RTX 3070, making it a viable option for Vulkan-based workloads where the newer card's advantages are muted.

Architecture Differences

The M4000M uses the GM204 chip on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 5,200 million transistors into a 398 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.1 million per square millimeter. The RTX 3070 uses the GA104 chip on Ampere architecture, fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process. It contains 17,400 million transistors in a 392 mm² die, achieving a density of 44.4 million per square millimeter, over three times the M4000M's density despite a slightly smaller die.

The architectural gap is stark. The M4000M has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The RTX 3070 has 5,888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The RTX 3070 also introduces dedicated hardware absent from the M4000M: 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores. These enable features like hardware-accelerated ray tracing and DLSS, capabilities the Maxwell architecture simply cannot offer. The M4000M's maximum DirectX support is 12 (12_1), while the RTX 3070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), including mesh shaders and variable rate shading.

Memory configurations diverge significantly. The M4000M uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.4 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 3070 doubles the capacity to 8 GB of GDDR6 on the same 256-bit bus, but nearly triples bandwidth to 448.0 GB/s thanks to faster 14 Gbps effective memory speed versus 5 Gbps on the M4000M. Clock speeds also tell the story: the M4000M runs at 975 MHz base and 1013 MHz boost, while the RTX 3070 runs at 1500 MHz base and 1725 MHz boost. The RTX 3070's memory clock of 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) dwarfs the M4000M's 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

Power and physical design reflect their intended markets. The M4000M is an MXM Module with 100 W TDP and no power connectors, designed for mobile workstations. The RTX 3070 is a dual-slot desktop card with a 220 W TDP, requiring a 1x 12-pin connector and a suggested 550 W power supply. The RTX 3070 measures 242 mm in length and 112 mm in height. The M4000M's dimensions are portable-device dependent. The M4000M uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RTX 3070 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, doubling the interface bandwidth. Display outputs also differ: the M4000M's are portable-device dependent, while the RTX 3070 offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test produces the most decisive result. The RTX 3070 scores 112,821, a figure 82.3% higher than the M4000M's 19,989. This gap aligns with the raw compute difference: the RTX 3070's FP32 throughput of 20.31 TFLOPS is roughly eight times the M4000M's 2.593 TFLOPS. The OpenCL workload heavily favors the RTX 3070's 5,888 shading units and 184 tensor cores, which accelerate compute tasks beyond what the M4000M's 1,280 shading units can manage. The 82.3% delta is the largest in any benchmark between these two cards.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a different story. The RTX 3070 wins with 21,022 against 20,971, a margin of just 0.2%. This near-tie suggests that Vulkan performance in this specific test does not scale with raw compute resources. The M4000M's Maxwell architecture, despite being two generations older, handles the Vulkan workload efficiently. The 51-point difference falls well within run-to-run variance, but the recorded data shows the RTX 3070 as the winner. This result is notable because it shows the M4000M's Vulkan 1.4 API support, matching the RTX 3070's Vulkan 1.4, and that in certain workloads, architectural maturity can offset raw specification advantages.

The RTX 3070's broader benchmark suite reveals its performance character. In Passmark tests, it scores 247 in DirectX 9, 150 in DirectX 10, 182 in DirectX 11, and 85 in DirectX 12. The Passmark G3D score of 22,214 and GPU compute score of 11,195 show strong overall performance. The 2D score of 1,001 is less impressive. The M4000M has no Passmark results recorded, so direct comparison in these legacy APIs is impossible. The RTX 3070 also has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,162, a test the M4000M does not appear in.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The M4000M has an average benchmark score of 20,480, while the RTX 3070 averages 17,208. However, the M4000M's average is based on only two Geekbench tests, while the RTX 3070's includes ten tests across multiple suites.

Q: How large is the Geekbench OpenCL performance gap?

A: The RTX 3070 scores 112,821 versus the M4000M's 19,989, a difference of 82.3%. This is the largest recorded margin between the two cards.

Q: Does the M4000M beat the RTX 3070 in any benchmark?

A: No. The recorded head-to-head data shows the RTX 3070 winning both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan tests. The Vulkan margin is only 0.2%, however.

Q: What are the transistor density differences?

A: The RTX 3070 has a transistor density of 44.4 million per square millimeter, versus 13.1 million per square millimeter for the M4000M. This reflects the shift from 28 nm to 8 nm manufacturing.

Q: Does the M4000M support ray tracing?

A: No. The M4000M has zero ray tracing cores, while the RTX 3070 has 46. The M4000M's Maxwell architecture predates hardware ray tracing in NVIDIA GPUs.

Q: What memory technologies do the two cards use?

A: The M4000M uses 4 GB of GDDR5 with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 3070 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, nearly triple the bandwidth despite the same 256-bit bus width.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The RTX 3070 uses the GA104 chip on Ampere architecture, while the M4000M uses GM204 on Maxwell 2.0. Manufacturing processes differ: 8 nm at Samsung for the RTX 3070, 28 nm at TSMC for the M4000M. Transistor counts are 17,400 million versus 5,200 million, with die sizes of 392 mm² and 398 mm² respectively. Transistor density is 44.4M per mm² against 13.1M per mm².

Core configurations show the RTX 3070's superiority: 5,888 shading units versus 1,280, 184 TMUs versus 80, and 96 ROPs versus 64. The RTX 3070 adds 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the M4000M. Clock speeds favor the RTX 3070: 1500 MHz base and 1725 MHz boost versus 975 MHz base and 1013 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity and bandwidth differ: 8 GB GDDR6 with 448.0 GB/s versus 4 GB GDDR5 with 160.4 GB/s. Both use 256-bit buses. Pixel rate is 165.6 GPixel/s versus 64.83 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 317.4 GTexel/s versus 81.04 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 20.31 TFLOPS versus 2.593 TFLOPS. The RTX 3070 also has FP16 at 20.31 TFLOPS (1:1), while the M4000M has no recorded FP16 capability.

Power consumption jumps from 100 W on the M4000M to 220 W on the RTX 3070. The M4000M is an MXM Module with no power connectors, while the RTX 3070 is dual-slot with a 1x 12-pin connector and a suggested 550 W power supply. The RTX 3070 uses PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16 on the M4000M. Display outputs are portable-device dependent on the M4000M, while the RTX 3070 offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The RTX 3070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the M4000M supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The M4000M was released on 2015-08-17, the RTX 3070 on 2020-08-31. The RTX 3070 has a launch MSRP of 499 USD. The M4000M's production status is end-of-life, as is the RTX 3070's.