NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 and the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 occupy opposite ends of the GPU timeline, and the recorded data reflects that gap in nearly every field. The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 is a modern Ada Lovelace gaming card built on TSMC's 5 nm process with 16 GB of GDDR6X, while the Quadro M4000 is a Maxwell 2.0-era professional card produced on a 28 nm node with 8 GB of GDDR5. In the database's only head-to-head benchmark, the 3DMark Steel Nomad DirectX 12 test, the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 scores 6269.5 against the M4000's 680, a difference of 822 percent. Both cards are end-of-life products, but they serve very different buyer profiles, and the data makes the choice straightforward.

The Verdict

The data points to the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 for anyone whose workload is measured in frames or compute throughput. Its Steel Nomad score of 6269.5 is more than nine times the M4000's 680, and its FP32 throughput of 44.10 TFLOPS dwarfs the M4000's 2.573 TFLOPS. It sits in the 36th percentile versus all GPUs in the database with an average benchmark score of 6270, placing it essentially even with cards like the GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER (6270, 0 percent delta) and slightly ahead of the Quadro K620 (6282, -0.2 percent) and Radeon R7 M350 (6327, -0.9 percent) in its scoring neighborhood.

The Quadro M4000 still has a defensible niche in the recorded data. Its average benchmark score of 5467 and 32nd percentile ranking place it near the Radeon R7 M440 (5483, -0.3 percent), the Radeon 610M (5444, 0.4 percent), the GeForce GTX 765M (5501, -0.6 percent), and the GeForce MX130 (5508, -0.7 percent). That rival set consists of mobile and entry-level parts, which tells you where the M4000 lands in relative terms today. Its strengths are physical and operational: a 120 W TDP, a single-slot footprint, a single 6-pin power connector, a 300 W suggested PSU, and four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs for multi-monitor professional setups. If the priority is driving several displays in a compact workstation with minimal power delivery, the M4000's spec sheet argues for it. For everything else, the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 wins on the numbers.

One caveat from the data: the M4000 carries ten recorded benchmark results spanning Geekbench OpenCL (19118) and Vulkan (24640), Passmark G3D (6680), and multiple Passmark DirectX tests, while the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has a single recorded Steel Nomad result. Direct comparisons in this pairing rest on that one shared test.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these cards is the story of nearly a decade of GPU development. The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 uses the AD102 chip on the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. It packs 76,300 million transistors into a 609 mm² die, yielding a density of 125.3M per mm². The M4000 uses the GM204 chip on Maxwell 2.0, built by TSMC on a 28 nm process, with 5,200 million transistors across a 398 mm² die and a density of just 13.1M per mm². That is roughly a tenfold difference in transistor density, and it shows up everywhere else in the spec sheet.

The Ada card includes 66 RT cores and 264 tensor cores, hardware the Maxwell card simply lacks, with the M4000 listing null values for both. That means hardware-accelerated ray tracing and tensor-based workloads are exclusive to the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 in this pairing. API support diverges at the feature level too: the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the M4000 stops at DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Memory subsystems differ sharply. The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 pairs 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus running at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) for 672.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The M4000 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on the same 256-bit bus width, clocked at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for 192.3 GB/s. Identical bus widths, vastly different throughput.

Platform requirements also diverge. The Ada card uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and needs a 16-pin power connector against a 285 W TDP with a 600 W suggested PSU. The M4000 runs PCIe 3.0 x16 with a 6-pin connector at 120 W TDP and a 300 W suggested PSU. Generation lineage differs as well: the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 succeeds GeForce 30 and precedes GeForce 50, while the M4000 sits between Quadro Kepler and Quadro Pascal.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 than the Quadro M4000 in the shared benchmark?

A: In 3DMark Steel Nomad DirectX 12, the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 scores 6269.5 versus 680 for the M4000, an 822 percent advantage for the Ada card.

Q: Do both cards support ray tracing?

A: No. The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has 66 RT cores and 264 tensor cores. The M4000 has neither, listing null for both fields.

Q: Which card needs the bigger power supply?

A: The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102, with a 285 W TDP and a 600 W suggested PSU fed by a 16-pin connector. The M4000 draws 120 W through a 6-pin connector with a 300 W suggested PSU.

Q: How do their database rankings compare?

A: The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 sits in the 36th percentile versus all GPUs with an average score of 6270. The M4000 sits in the 32nd percentile with an average score of 5467.

Q: Which card supports more modern display outputs?

A: The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 offers one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The M4000 offers four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, more ports but on an older revision.

Q: Are either of these cards still in production?

A: No, both are listed as end-of-life. The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 launched with a 799 USD launch MSRP; no launch MSRP is recorded for the M4000.

Specification Differences

| Field | RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 | Quadro M4000 |

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

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Maxwell 2.0 |

| Chip | AD102 | GM204 |

| Process node | 5 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 76,300 million | 5,200 million |

| Die size | 609 mm² | 398 mm² |

| Transistor density | 125.3M / mm² | 13.1M / mm² |

| Base / boost clock | 2340 MHz / 2610 MHz | Not recorded |

| Memory | 16 GB GDDR6X | 8 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 672.3 GB/s | 192.3 GB/s |

| Shading units | 8448 | 1664 |

| TMUs | 264 | 104 |

| ROPs | 96 | 64 |

| RT cores | 66 | None |

| Tensor cores | 264 | None |

| Pixel rate | 250.6 GPixel/s | 49.47 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 689.0 GTexel/s | 80.39 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 44.10 TFLOPS | 2.573 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 44.10 TFLOPS (1:1) | Not recorded |

| TDP | 285 W | 120 W |

| Slot width | Triple-slot | Single-slot |

| Power connector | 1x 16-pin | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 300 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 4x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Length | 310 mm | 241 mm |

| Height | 140 mm | 111 mm |

| Release date | 2024-06-09 | 2015-06-28 |

The two cards share a manufacturer, a foundry, a 256-bit memory bus, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. Everything else diverges.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records one shared test between these cards, and it is decisive. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DirectX 12, the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 scores 6269.5 while the Quadro M4000 scores 680, an 822 percent margin for the Ada card. That single result accounts for the full head-to-head record: one win for the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102, zero for the M4000.

The theoretical numbers explain the gap. The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 delivers 44.10 TFLOPS of FP32 compute against the M4000's 2.573 TFLOPS, a factor of roughly seventeen. Texture throughput is 689.0 GTexel/s versus 80.39 GTexel/s, and pixel fill rate is 250.6 GPixel/s versus 49.47 GPixel/s. Memory bandwidth is 672.3 GB/s versus 192.3 GB/s. Across every shared metric, the 4070 Ti SUPER AD132's lead is measured in multiples, not percentages.

Context softens the picture slightly. The M4000's broader benchmark record, including Geekbench Vulkan at 24640 and Geekbench OpenCL at 19118, shows it still functioning as a capable compute part for its class, and its Passmark G3D score of 6680 sits close to its 5467 database average. But against an Ada Lovelace card with dedicated ray tracing and tensor hardware, the Maxwell part is outclassed. The data supports one conclusion: for performance, the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102; for a low-power, single-slot, quad-display legacy workstation card, the M4000.