NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q vs NVIDIA RTX A4000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark between the two cards is Geekbench Vulkan, and the result is decisive. The NVIDIA RTX A4000 scores 127,645, while the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q scores 31,220. The RTX A4000 leads by 75.5%, a massive margin that reflects the generational gap between the two architectures.

In terms of percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database, the GRID M60-1Q sits at the 76th percentile, while the RTX A4000 sits at the 72nd percentile. This is an interesting inversion: the older card ranks higher in overall percentile despite losing the head-to-head test. However, that percentile is based on a single benchmark for the GRID, while the RTX A4000 has ten recorded benchmarks across multiple test suites, including DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, OpenCL, and compute workloads. The RTX A4000's average benchmark score across all tests is 26,683, while the GRID M60-1Q's average is 31,220 from its sole Vulkan result.

Looking at the RTX A4000's other results, its Passmark G3D score of 19,459 and Passmark GPU Compute score of 9,760 show strong general-purpose and compute performance. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 105,739 reinforces its compute capability. For DirectX workloads, it scores 240 on Passmark DirectX 9, 158 on DirectX 11, 126 on DirectX 10, and 72 on DirectX 12. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 2,604.

The GRID M60-1Q's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 (average score 31,206, a 0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER (31,087, 0.4% delta), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (31,532, -1% delta), and the NVIDIA TITAN RTX (31,676, -1.4% delta). This places the GRID M60-1Q in a tight cluster where performance differences are within 1.4 percentage points.

The RTX A4000's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (26,553, 0.5% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (26,421, 1% delta), the AMD Radeon 860M (26,401, 1.1% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (26,331, 1.3% delta). The RTX A4000 leads all of these by small margins, but the Vulkan score shows it is far ahead of the GRID M60-1Q.

Architecture Differences

The GRID M60-1Q is built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM204 chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.1 million per mm². The chip includes 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. It has no dedicated ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The base clock is 557 MHz with a boost clock of 1178 MHz. Memory runs at 1253 MHz with 5 Gbps effective speed.

The RTX A4000 uses the Ampere architecture with the GA104 chip, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It contains 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 44.4 million per mm², more than three times higher than the Maxwell part. The RTX A4000 has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. It also includes 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores. Clocks are significantly higher: 735 MHz base and 1560 MHz boost.

The memory subsystem is also fundamentally different. The GRID M60-1Q has 1 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A4000 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s. That is 15 GB more capacity, a 16x increase, and roughly 2.8 times the bandwidth.

Compute throughput shows the scale of the architectural leap. The GRID M60-1Q delivers 4.825 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and a pixel rate of 75.39 GPixel/s, with a texture rate of 150.8 GTexel/s. The RTX A4000 delivers 19.17 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio), with a pixel rate of 149.8 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 299.5 GTexel/s. The RTX A4000 has nearly 4 times the FP32 throughput and roughly double the pixel and texture fill rates.

The power profiles diverge heavily. The GRID M60-1Q consumes 225 W TDP with a dual-slot cooler and a single 8-pin power connector, requiring a suggested 500 W power supply. The RTX A4000 consumes 140 W TDP with a single-slot cooler and a single 6-pin connector, requiring a suggested 300 W power supply. The RTX A4000 is more powerful while consuming 85 W less and occupying half the slot width.

Interface and connectivity differ as well. The GRID M60-1Q uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and has no display outputs; it is a server-class card designed for virtualized environments. The RTX A4000 uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

API support shows the generational change. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the GRID M60-1Q supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the RTX A4000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The RTX A4000 also has hardware ray tracing and tensor cores, which the Maxwell part lacks entirely.

FAQ

Q: What is the performance difference in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The RTX A4000 scores 127,645 while the GRID M60-1Q scores 31,220. The RTX A4000 is 75.5% faster in this test.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The GRID M60-1Q has 1 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the RTX A4000 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Q: Which card consumes less power?

A: The RTX A4000 has a 140 W TDP with a 300 W suggested PSU, while the GRID M60-1Q has a 225 W TDP with a 500 W suggested PSU.

Q: Do these cards have ray tracing or tensor cores?

A: The RTX A4000 has 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores. The GRID M60-1Q has no RT cores and no tensor cores.

Q: What is the interface difference?

A: The GRID M60-1Q uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RTX A4000 uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Q: Can either card output to displays?

A: The GRID M60-1Q has no display outputs. The RTX A4000 has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | GRID M60-1Q | RTX A4000 |

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

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 5,200 million | 17,400 million |

| Die Size | 398 mm² | 392 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.1M / mm² | 44.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 557 MHz | 735 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz | 1560 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1253 MHz, 5 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.4 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 128 | 192 |

| ROPs | 64 | 96 |

| RT Cores | None | 48 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 192 |

| Pixel Rate | 75.39 GPixel/s | 149.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 150.8 GTexel/s | 299.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.825 TFLOPS | 19.17 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not specified | 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 225 W | 140 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

| Dimensions | 267 mm (10.5 inches) length | 241 mm (9.5 inches) length, 112 mm (4.4 inches) height |

| Release Date | 2015-08-29 | 2021-04-11 |

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

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the RTX A4000 is the superior GPU in every meaningful performance metric. It delivers 75.5% higher Vulkan performance, nearly 4 times the FP32 throughput, 2.8 times the memory bandwidth, and 16 times the memory capacity. It does this while consuming 85 W less power, occupying a single slot instead of dual slots, and requiring a 200 W smaller power supply.

The GRID M60-1Q should be chosen only for specific legacy virtualized workloads where its Maxwell architecture is a known quantity. Its lack of display outputs means it is strictly a server-side compute device. The RTX A4000, with its 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, PCIe 4.0 interface, and DirectX 12 Ultimate support, is usable both as a workstation card and in compute environments.

The RTX A4A000 also has future-proofing advantages: tensor cores for AI workloads, RT cores for ray tracing, and FP16 performance at 1:1 ratio with FP32. None of these exist on the GRID M60-1X.

The percentile ranking might confuse some readers, since the GRID M60-1X sits at the 76th percentile while the RTX A4000 sits at the 72nd. This is because the GRID's percentile is based on a single strong Vulkan result from an older benchmark suite, while the RTX A4000's average includes many demanding modern tests. The head-to-head Vulkan result is the reliable comparison, and it shows a clear winner.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA RTX A4000:

• All compute and graphics benchmarks where they overlap. The 75.5% Vulkan advantage is decisive.
• Memory capacity and bandwidth. 16 GB at 448.0 GB/s versus 1 GB at 160.4 GB/s.
• Power efficiency. 140 W TDP with 19.17 TFLOPS FP32 versus 225 W TDP with 4.825 TFLOPS.
• Physical footprint. Single-slot versus dual-slot.
• Modern API support. DirectX 12 Ultimate versus DirectX 12 (12_1).
• Workstation flexibility, with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.
• AI and ray tracing workloads via 192 tensor cores and 48 RT cores.

NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q:

• The percentile ranking is higher (76th versus 72nd), but this is based on a single benchmark and should be interpreted with caution.
• The GRID has no display outputs, which is intentional for virtualized desktop infrastructure where displays are remote.
• The 28 nm Maxwell architecture is well understood in legacy virtualized environments, though the 8 nm Ampere with its different feature set is a clear step forward.
• The GRID M60-1Q has a lower transistor density (10.1M per mm² versus 44.4M per mm²), which is an architectural characteristic, not a performance advantage.
• The 267 mm length is slightly longer than the RTX A4000's 241 mm, which in server chassis with specific form factors.

For a modern deployment, the RTX A4000 is the only reasonable choice based on the recorded data. The GRID M60-1Q is end-of-life, has a fraction of the memory and compute throughput, and lacks the tensor and RT features that are increasingly standard. The RTX A4000 also ends-of-life, but its newer architecture and higher specification make it the better option for any workload where performance matters.