NVIDIA Quadro K4000 vs NVIDIA T600 Comparison

The Verdict

The data points to a single clear outcome: the NVIDIA T600 outperforms the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 in every recorded benchmark where both cards were measured. In Geekbench OpenCL, the T600 scores 27,875 against the K4000's 6,816, a 309% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the T600 scores 25,580 against 6,964, a 267.3% lead. The database records two wins for the T600 and zero for the K4000 in their shared tests.

The T600 also holds a higher average benchmark score of 7,035 versus 5,982, and it sits at the 39th percentile of all GPUs compared to the K4000's 34th. In practical terms, the T600's nearest rivals in the database are the GeForce GTX 970 (average score 7,157, which is 1.7% above the T600), the GTX 680M (7,023, 0.2% behind), and the Radeon R5 M240 (6,975, 0.9% behind). The K4000, meanwhile, sits in a cluster with the Quadro K4000M (5,986, 0.1% above), the FirePro W4100 (5,987, 0.1% above), and the Radeon HD 8750M (5,970, 0.2% below).

Who should pick which? The T600 is the choice for anyone whose workload is captured by OpenCL or Vulkan compute, which is the only head-to-head evidence available. The K4000 offers no benchmark win in the database to justify selection on performance. However, the K4000 does have a documented launch MSRP of 1,269 USD, and it is a single-slot card with a 241 mm length and 111 mm height, so it may fit specific chassis constraints. The T600 is also single-slot and uses no power connectors, while the K4000 requires a single 6-pin connector. For raw performance, the T600 wins unequivocally; for legacy compatibility with older display outputs, the K4000 provides a DVI port alongside two DisplayPort 1.2 outputs.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the recorded benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA T600 wins both shared tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 27,875 versus 6,816 for the K4000, a 309% difference. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 25,580 versus 6,964, a 267.3% difference.

Q: How do the two cards compare in overall average score?

A: The T600 has an average benchmark score of 7,035, which places it at the 39th percentile of all GPUs. The K4000 has an average of 5,982, placing it at the 34th percentile.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each card?

A: The T600 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The K4000 has 3 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 134.8 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: No. The T600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The K4000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the T600 has a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The T600 has a 40 W TDP and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 200 W. The K4000 has an 80 W TDP and requires one 6-pin power connector, with a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: Which card has better compute throughput on paper?

A: The T600 delivers 1.709 TFLOPS FP32 and 3.418 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The K4000 delivers 1,244.2 GFLOPS FP32 and has no recorded FP16 figure. The T600 also has higher pixel rate (42.72 GPixel/s versus 12.96 GPixel/s) and slightly higher texture rate (53.40 GTexel/s versus 51.84 GTexel/s).

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different NVIDIA architectures, fabricated on different process nodes. The T600 uses the TU117 chip built on Turing architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 12 nm process. The K4000 uses the GK106 chip built on Kepler architecture, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process. The transistor counts reflect the generational gap: the T600 packs 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.5 million per mm². The K4000 has 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, for a density of 11.5 million per mm².

The T600 belongs to the Quadro Turing (Tx000) generation, while the K4000 belongs to the Quadro Kepler (Kx000) generation. The T600's predecessor is listed as Quadro Volta and its successor as Workstation Ampere. The K4000's predecessor is Quadro Fermi and its successor is Quadro Maxwell. Both cards are end-of-life in production status.

The feature sets differ in memory technology and compute capabilities. The T600 uses GDDR6 memory with a 10 Gbps effective data rate, while the K4000 uses GDDR5 at 5.6 Gbps effective. The T600 has no recorded RT cores or tensor cores, and neither does the K4000. The T600 does have FP16 support at a 2:1 ratio, while the K4000 lists no FP16 capability at all.

In terms of shader resources, the K4000 actually has more shading units (768 versus 640) and more texture mapping units (64 versus 40). However, the T600 has more ROPs (32 versus 24) and much higher clock-derived throughput. The T600's pixel rate of 42.72 GPixel/s is more than three times the K4000's 12.96 GPixel/s, despite the K4000's higher unit counts.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field. The T600's base clock is 735 MHz with a boost clock of 1,335 MHz, while the K4000 lists no base or boost clocks in the database. Memory clocks differ substantially: the T600 runs at 1,250 MHz with 10 Gbps effective data rate, while the K4000 runs at 1,404 MHz with 5.6 Gbps effective.

Memory capacity favors the T600 at 4 GB versus 3 GB, and memory type is GDDR6 versus GDDR5. Bus width favors the K4000 at 192 bit versus 128 bit, but bandwidth favors the T600 at 160.0 GB/s versus 134.8 GB/s. The TDP difference is notable: 40 W for the T600 versus 80 W for the K4000. The K4000 requires a 6-pin power connector, while the T600 uses none. The suggested PSU is 200 W for the T600 and 250 W for the K4000.

Bus interface also differs: the T600 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the K4000 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. Display outputs are different as well: the T600 has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the K4000 has one DVI and two DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The K4000 has physical dimensions recorded at 241 mm length and 111 mm height; the T600 has no dimensions listed.

The API support differs in DirectX and Vulkan versions. The T600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the K4000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The release dates differ by about eight years: the T600 released in April 2021, the K4000 in February 2013. The K4000 has a recorded launch MSRP of 1,269 USD; the T600 has none.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The shared benchmark pool between these two cards is small but decisive. Two tests appear in both records: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the T600 scores 27,875 against the K4000's 6,816. That is a delta of 309%, meaning the T600 delivers roughly four times the OpenCL performance. This is the largest win for either card in any comparison. The score gap is stark: the T600's OpenCL result alone exceeds the K4000's entire average benchmark score (5,982) by a factor of more than four.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the T600 scores 25,580 against the K4000's 6,964, a delta of 267.3%. Again, the T600 more than triples the K4000's result. The K4000's Vulkan score is its highest recorded benchmark in the database, but it still falls far short of the T600's lowest shared-test score.

The T600 also has additional benchmark data that the K4000 lacks entirely. In Passmark tests, the T600 records a G3D score of 6,479, a G2D score of 756, a GPU compute score of 2,402, and DirectX scores of 114 (DirectX 9), 49 (DirectX 11), 32 (DirectX 10), and 25 (DirectX 12). The K4000 has no Passmark entries, and its only additional benchmark is Geekbench Metal with a score of 4,166, which the T600 does not record. The database shows no test where the K4000 wins.

The average benchmark score comparison reinforces the head-to-head results. The T600 averages 7,035 across its recorded benchmarks, which is 17.6% above the K4000's average of 5,982. The nearest rival to the T600 is the GeForce GTX 970 at 7,157, which sits 1.7% above it; the nearest rival to the K4000 is the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server at 5,996, which sits 0.2% above it. Neither card leads its immediate rival cluster by a wide margin, but the gap between the two cards themselves is substantial.

Where Each One Wins

The T600 wins in every performance category where both cards have data. Its 309% OpenCL lead and 267.3% Vulkan lead make it the clear choice for compute-oriented workloads that use these APIs. Its higher pixel rate (42.72 GPixel/s versus 12.96 GPixel/s) suggests stronger fill-rate-bound performance in rendering tasks. Its FP32 throughput of 1.709 TFLOPS versus 1,244.2 GFLOPS gives it a solid edge in general compute, and its FP16 capability at 3.418 TFLOPS opens up workloads that the K4000 cannot accelerate at all.

The T600 also wins on efficiency. Its 40 W TDP is half the K4000's 80 W, and it requires no external power connector while the K4000 needs a 6-pin connector. The suggested PSU is lower as well: 200 W versus 250 W. For system integrators or users with power constraints, the T600 is the more flexible option. Its four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs also exceed the K4000's one DVI and two DisplayPort 1.2 outputs in both count and version.

The K4000's recorded advantages are narrower. It has more shading units (768 versus 640) and more TMUs (64 versus 40), though these do not translate into benchmark wins. It has a wider memory bus (192 bit versus 128 bit), though lower memory bandwidth (134.8 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s). It has a recorded launch MSRP of 1,269 USD, but no performance data to justify that figure in the current database. Its DVI output may be relevant for legacy displays, and its physical dimensions (241 mm length, 111 mm height) are documented for chassis compatibility checks, though the T600's dimensions are not recorded for comparison.

The database records two wins for the T600 and zero for the K4000. For any workload represented by Geekbench OpenCL or Vulkan, the T600 is the recommended card. For workloads that rely on DVI output or that require the K4000's specific form factor, the K4000 remains an option, but the performance data offers no case for choosing it on speed.