NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4100M Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4100M records an average benchmark score of 7906, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M scores 6946. That places the Quadro roughly 13.8% higher in overall database performance.

Q: How do the two compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The Quadro K4100M scores 9149 in Geekbench OpenCL, versus 6946 for the GTX 675M. This represents a 31.7% advantage for the Quadro in that specific compute workload.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each GPU?

A: The Quadro K4100M sits in the 41st percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the GTX 675M sits in the 39th percentile. Both are mid-pack performers, but the Quadro ranks slightly higher.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX and OpenGL versions?

A: Yes, both report DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 support. However, the Quadro K4100M also lists Vulkan 1.2.175 support, while the GTX 675M lists no Vulkan support in the database.

Q: Which card has more memory and what type?

A: The Quadro K4100M has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, while the GTX 675M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on the same 256-bit bus. The Quadro also has higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are marked as end-of-life in the database. The GTX 675M was released earlier, on 2012-03-21, while the Quadro K4100M followed on 2013-07-22.

Architecture Differences

The Quadro K4100M is built on the GK104 chip using NVIDIA's Kepler architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The GTX 675M uses the GF114 chip with the older Fermi 2.0 architecture, built on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. The process shrink gives the Quadro a significantly higher transistor density: 12.0 million transistors per square millimeter versus 5.9 million for the GTX 675M.

Despite the smaller die, the Quadro packs more transistors overall. The GK104 contains 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the GF114 contains 1,950 million transistors on a larger 332 mm² die. This is a direct consequence of the newer manufacturing node, allowing the Quadro to fit roughly 81% more transistors into a smaller physical area.

The execution resources differ substantially. The Quadro K4100M has 1,152 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 675M has 384 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Quadro therefore has three times the shader count and 50% more texture units, while both share the same ROP count.

Clock behavior also differs. The Quadro runs at a fixed 706 MHz base and boost clock, whereas the GTX 675M has no base or boost clock listed in the database, only a memory clock of 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective). The Quadro's memory runs at 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective), giving it a modest memory clock advantage.

The memory subsystems are similar in bus width but differ in capacity and bandwidth. Both use a 256-bit bus and GDDR5, but the Quadro has 4 GB versus 2 GB, and 102.4 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The API support is nearly identical, except that the Quadro lists Vulkan 1.2.175 while the GTX 675M has no Vulkan entry.

The GTX 675M belongs to the GeForce 600M generation, while the Quadro K4100M belongs to the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M) generation. Both are MXM modules with no power connectors listed, and both use the MXM-B (3.0) bus interface. Display outputs are portable-device dependent for both.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The Quadro K4100M scores 9149, and the GTX 675M scores 6946. The Quadro wins this test by 31.7%, a commanding margin. This is the only recorded head-to-head test, and the Quadro takes it decisively.

To put that 31.7% gap in context, the GTX 675M's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon R5 M240 at 6975 (0.4% behind the GTX 675M) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M at 7023 (1.1% behind). The Quadro's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 at 7925 (0.2% ahead of the Quadro) and the NVIDIA Quadro P5000 at 8039 (1.7% ahead). The Quadro's OpenCL score of 9149 is well above its own average benchmark score of 7906, suggesting it performs particularly well in OpenCL compute workloads relative to other tests.

The GTX 675M's OpenCL score of 6946 sits close to its own average benchmark score of 6946, which is the only benchmark recorded for that card. Its nearest rival above is the NVIDIA T600 at 7035 (1.3% ahead), and its nearest rival below is the AMD FirePro M5100 at 6830 (1.7% behind). The GTX 675M therefore occupies a narrow band of performance around the 6900 to 7000 mark.

The overall average benchmark scores tell a similar story but with a smaller gap. The Quadro averages 7906, and the GTX 675M averages 6946. The difference is about 960 points, or roughly 13.8%. The Quadro's average is pulled up by its strong OpenCL result, while the GTX 675M has no other recorded benchmark to balance its score.

The percentile rankings reflect this. The Quadro sits at the 41st percentile, and the GTX 675M at the 39th. Both are below the median of all GPUs in the database, but the Quadro ranks a couple of percentage points higher.

The Verdict

The data points clearly in one direction. The Quadro K4100M beats the GTX 675M in the only shared benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, by 31.7%. It also has a higher average benchmark score (7906 versus 6946), a higher percentile ranking (41st versus 39th), and a more modern architecture on a smaller process node.

The Quadro K4100M should be the choice for workloads that rely on OpenCL compute performance, where it shows a substantial advantage. Its 4 GB of memory and higher bandwidth also make it more suitable for larger datasets or higher-resolution textures, assuming the rest of the system can take advantage of them. The fixed 706 MHz clock across base and boost suggests consistent sustained performance rather than bursty behavior.

The GTX 675M, however, is not without reasons to exist. It consumes the same 100 W TDP as the Quadro, making it equally power-efficient in that regard. It has the same 256-bit memory bus and the same 32 ROPs. For scenarios where the application is ROP-bound or memory-bus-bound rather than shader-bound, the GTX 675M may hold up better than its raw shader count suggests. Its lower transistor count on a larger die also implies a simpler, potentially more mature design.

But the benchmark data does not favor the GTX 675M. Its only recorded score, 6946 in OpenCL, is 31.7% behind the Quadro's OpenCL result. Its nearest rivals cluster around the 6800 to 7035 range, placing it in a lower performance tier than the Quadro, whose rivals cluster around the 7925 to 8053 range.

For buyers choosing between these two end-of-life mobile GPUs, the Quadro K4100M is the stronger performer in compute tasks and has more memory. The GTX 675M may be preferable in systems where its specific feature set or driver behavior is required, but the recorded data shows no benchmark where it wins. The Quadro takes this comparison on every measurable axis.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every core specification. The Quadro K4100M uses the GK104 chip on a 28 nm process with 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The GTX 675M uses the GF114 chip on a 40 nm process with 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die. Transistor density is 12.0M per mm² for the Quadro versus 5.9M per mm² for the GTX 675M.

Clock speeds: the Quadro has a base and boost clock of 706 MHz, while the GTX 675M has no base or boost clock listed. Memory clocks are 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective) for the Quadro and 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective) for the GTX 675M.

Memory configuration: the Quadro has 4 GB of GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 675M has 2 GB of GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources: the Quadro has 1,152 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 675M has 384 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Pixel rate is 16.94 GPixel/s for the Quadro versus 9.920 GPixel/s for the GTX 675M. Texture rate is 67.78 GTexel/s versus 39.68 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1.627 TFLOPS versus 952.3 GFLOPS.

API support: both list DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but only the Quadro lists Vulkan 1.2.175. The GTX 675M has no Vulkan entry.

Other differences: the Quadro has a launch MSRP of 1,499 USD, while the GTX 675M has no launch MSRP listed. The Quadro was released on 2013-07-22, and the GTX 675M on 2012-03-21. The Quadro's generation is Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M), and the GTX 675M's is GeForce 600M. The Quadro's predecessor is Quadro Fermi-M and its successor is Quadro Maxwell-M. The GTX 675M's predecessor is GeForce 500M and its successor is GeForce 700M. Both share the same TDP of 100 W, slot form factor of MXM Module, no power connectors, MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, and portable-device-dependent display outputs.