NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M vs NVIDIA Quadro P4000 Comparison

# NVIDIA Quadro P4000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M

The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M occupy very different positions in the GPU landscape. The Quadro P4000, built on the Pascal architecture with a 16 nm process, is a professional workstation card designed for compute-intensive tasks, while the GTX 950M, based on Maxwell architecture at 28 nm, targets mobile gaming in laptops. The database records show the Quadro P4000 with an average benchmark score of 9665, placing it in the 47th percentile of all GPUs, whereas the GTX 950M averages 8135, sitting in the 42nd percentile. These figures alone suggest a meaningful performance gap, but the detailed measurements reveal far more about how these two cards differ in capability and intended use.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 records an average benchmark score of 9665, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M averages 8135. This represents a difference of approximately 18.8% in favor of the Quadro P4000.

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

A: The Quadro P4000 scores 36212 in Geekbench OpenCL, versus 9745 for the GTX 950M. The Quadro P4000 leads by 271.6% in this compute-oriented benchmark.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The Quadro P4000 features 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 243.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 950M has 4 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 28.80 GB/s. The Quadro P4000 offers 8.4 times the memory bandwidth.

Q: What architectures do these GPUs use?

A: The Quadro P4000 uses the Pascal architecture with the GP104 chip, manufactured on a 16 nm process at TSMC. The GTX 950M uses the Maxwell architecture with the GM107 chip, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process.

Q: How many shading units does each card have?

A: The Quadro P4000 contains 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. The GTX 950M has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units.

Q: Which card supports newer DirectX features?

A: The Quadro P4000 supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1, while the GTX 950M supports DirectX 12 with feature level 11_0. The Quadro P4000 also lists Vulkan 1.4 support, and both cards support OpenGL 4.6.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data from the database shows a clear split between these two GPUs. The Quadro P4000 wins both head-to-head tests recorded, taking 2 wins against 0 for the GTX 950M. This outcome reflects the fundamental positioning of the two cards.

The Quadro P4000 dominates in compute-heavy workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P4000 achieves 36212 points, which is 271.6% higher than the GTX 950M's 9745 points. This massive margin indicates the Quadro P4000 is built for professional applications such as rendering, simulation, and data processing where OpenCL performance matters. The card also excels in Vulkan compute, scoring 41786 against the GTX 950M's 6525, a 540.4% advantage. These results position the Quadro P4000 as the clear choice for workstation tasks that rely on parallel compute.

The GTX 950M, by contrast, has no benchmark wins in the recorded head-to-head data. Its strengths lie elsewhere, primarily in its mobile form factor. The GTX 950M is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors and a 75 W TDP, making it suitable for laptops where space and cooling are constrained. The database does not list any benchmarks where the GTX 950M outperforms the Quadro P4000, so its advantage is purely in deployment flexibility rather than raw performance.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA architecture generations. The Quadro P4000 uses Pascal, while the GTX 950M uses Maxwell. This architectural divide explains many of the performance differences recorded in the database.

The manufacturing process differs substantially. The Quadro P4000 is built on a 16 nm process at TSMC, packing 7,200 million transistors into a 314 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 22.9 million per square millimeter. The GTX 950M uses a 28 nm process, with 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, giving a density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. The newer 16 nm process allows the Quadro P4000 to fit nearly four times as many transistors while maintaining a 105 W TDP.

The compute resources scale accordingly. The Quadro P4000 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, compared to 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs on the GTX 950M. The Quadro P4000 delivers 5.304 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 82.88 GFLOPS of FP16 performance at a 1:64 ratio. The GTX 950M manages 1,438.7 GFLOPS of FP32 and has no listed FP16 capability. The pixel rate for the Quadro P4000 is 94.72 GPixel/s with a texture rate of 165.8 GTexel/s, while the GTX 950M achieves 17.98 GPixel/s and 44.96 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. The Quadro P4000 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 243.3 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 1901 MHz (7.6 Gbps effective). The GTX 950M uses 4 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective). The Quadro P4000's GDDR5 memory provides far higher bandwidth, critical for large datasets common in professional workloads.

Specification Differences

Several specification fields differ between the two cards, reflecting their different design goals. The Quadro P4000 runs at a base clock of 1202 MHz with a boost clock of 1480 MHz, while the GTX 950M operates at 993 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost. The Quadro P4000's higher clocks contribute to its performance advantage.

Power characteristics differ notably. The Quadro P4000 has a 105 W TDP, requires a single 6-pin power connector, and suggests a 300 W power supply. The GTX 950M has a 75 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and has no suggested power supply listed. The GTX 950M is classified as an IGP with a single-slot form factor, while the Quadro P4000 is a single-slot card measuring 241 mm in length and 111 mm in height.

The bus interface differs as well. The Quadro P4000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the GTX 950M uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The wider interface on the Quadro P4000 allows greater data transfer capacity, beneficial for memory-intensive tasks. Display outputs also differ: the Quadro P4000 provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, whereas the GTX 950M relies on portable device dependent outputs, reflecting its laptop integration.

The Quadro P4000 supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1, while the GTX 950M supports DirectX 12 with feature level 11_0. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro P4000 has a listed launch MSRP of 815 USD, while the GTX 950M has no launch MSRP recorded. Production status for both is end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these GPUs, both in Geekbench tests. These measurements show a decisive performance gap.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P4000 scores 36212, while the GTX 950M scores 9745. The Quadro P4000 wins by 271.6%. This benchmark exercises general-purpose compute on the GPU, and the results reflect the Quadro P4000's larger shading unit count, higher clock speeds, and superior memory bandwidth. The 1792 shading units on the Quadro P4000 provide nearly three times the parallel processing capacity of the GTX 950M's 640 units, and the 243.3 GB/s memory bandwidth prevents data starvation during compute operations.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows an even larger gap. The Quadro P4000 achieves 41786 points, versus 6525 for the GTX 950M, a 540.4% difference. Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics and compute API, and the Quadro P4000's architecture handles this workload far more efficiently. The GTX 950M's Maxwell architecture, while capable, lacks the raw throughput needed to compete in this benchmark.

For context within their respective peer groups, the database lists nearest rivals. The Quadro P4000's average score of 9665 places it within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 (9653), 0.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M (9645), and 0.3% of the NVIDIA Quadro K5000 (9637), while sitting 0.5% behind the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 (9716). The GTX 950M's 8135 average sits within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon R9 M360 (8129), 0.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (8167), 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 945M (8099), and 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GRID K2 (8080). These groupings show that each card competes in a different performance tier, with the Quadro P4000's nearest rivals all scoring above 9600 while the GTX 950M's peers cluster around 8100.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 is the superior performer in every benchmark recorded, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M serves a different purpose entirely.

For users needing compute performance, the Quadro P4000 is the clear choice. Its 271.6% advantage in Geekbench OpenCL and 540.4% advantage in Geekbench Vulkan demonstrate overwhelming superiority in compute workloads. The 8 GB GDDR5 memory with 243.3 GB/s bandwidth, 1792 shading units, and 5.304 TFLOPS FP32 performance make it suitable for professional applications in CAD, scientific simulation, and content creation. The card's single-slot design, 105 W TDP, and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs also support multi-display workstation setups.

For users prioritizing mobility and low power, the GTX 950M fits a niche the Quadro P4000 cannot. Its 75 W TDP, no power connectors, and IGP form factor allow integration into laptops where the Quadro P4000's 241 mm length and 6-pin connector would be impractical. The 4 GB DDR3 memory and 640 shading units provide basic 3D acceleration for gaming and light productivity on portable systems. The GTX 950M's 42nd percentile ranking shows it as a mid-range mobile option, whereas the Quadro P4000's 47th percentile places it near the middle of all desktop GPUs.

The recorded data offers no scenario where the GTX 950M outperforms the Quadro P4000. Users choosing between these two should base their decision on form factor and power constraints rather than performance expectations. The Quadro P4000 excels in fixed installations where performance matters most, while the GTX 950M remains the only viable option for ultraportable deployments. Both are end-of-life products, but the Quadro P4000's architectural advantages in transistor count, memory bandwidth, and compute throughput make it the definitive choice for any workload that can accommodate its physical and power requirements.