NVIDIA T400 vs NVIDIA T400 4 GB Comparison

The NVIDIA T400 4 GB and the NVIDIA T400 are two nearly identical workstation graphics cards built on the same TU117 chip, but they differ in one critical specification: memory capacity. The benchmark data shows the 4 GB model is the faster of the two, winning both head-to-head tests, but the margins are slim. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the T400 4 GB scores 17,320 against the T400’s 17,039, a 1.6% advantage. The Vulkan test shows a similar story, with the 4 GB card scoring 16,263 versus 15,976, a 1.8% lead. These are not transformative differences, but they are consistent across both APIs, which suggests the extra memory offers a measurable, if modest, performance benefit.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data is clear-cut: the NVIDIA T400 4 GB wins both available benchmark comparisons. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the 4 GB variant scores 17,320, while the standard T400 scores 17,039. That is a 1.6% delta, meaning the 4 GB card completes the same compute workloads slightly faster. The Vulkan benchmark follows the same pattern, with the 4 GB card scoring 16,263 against the 2 GB card’s 15,976, a 1.8% advantage. Neither result is a blowout, but the 4 GB model wins outright in both tests, giving it a 2-0 record in head-to-head comparisons.

Contextualizing these scores against the broader GPU landscape is useful. The T400 4 GB’s average benchmark score is 16,792, placing it at the 60th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 7600S (16,696, a 0.6% delta), the NVIDIA Tesla M4 (16,932, a -0.8% delta), and the AMD Radeon HD 7970M (17,019, a -1.3% delta). The standard T400, meanwhile, has an average score of 16,508, also at the 60th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 (16,504, a 0% delta) and the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 (16,415, a 0.6% delta). This places both cards in the same performance tier, but the 4 GB version consistently sits slightly higher in the rankings.

The practical takeaway is that the 4 GB model is the better performer, but the gap is small enough that most users would not notice it outside of memory-sensitive workloads. If you are choosing between the two purely on benchmark scores, the 4 GB card is the one to pick. The data does not show a single test where the standard T400 wins.

Architecture Differences

Both cards share the same underlying architecture, so the differences are minimal. They are built on the NVIDIA Turing architecture, with the TU117 chip fabricated on TSMC’s 12 nm process. The die size is 200 mm², housing 4,700 million transistors, which works out to a transistor density of 23.5M per mm². The core configuration is identical: 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. Neither card features ray tracing cores or tensor cores, so they rely entirely on standard CUDA cores for compute tasks.

The clock speeds are also the same. Both cards have a base clock of 420 MHz and a boost clock of 1425 MHz. The memory clock is 1250 MHz, which translates to 10 Gbps effective. The memory bus is 64-bit wide, and the bandwidth is 80.00 GB/s for both cards. The pixel rate is 22.80 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 34.20 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,094.4 GFLOPS, while FP16 performance is 2.189 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) for both.

The single point of divergence is the memory capacity. The T400 4 GB has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the standard T400 has 2 GB of GDDR6 memory. Everything else — from the process node to the API support — is identical. This means the 4 GB model is not a different chip or a higher-binned part; it simply carries more memory on the same board. The power draw is also the same at 30 W, with no power connectors required and a suggested PSU of 200 W. Both cards are single-slot designs with three mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The NVIDIA T400 4 GB has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the standard NVIDIA T400 has 2 GB of GDDR6 memory. This is the only specification difference between the two cards.

Q: Are the benchmark scores significantly different?

A: The 4 GB model wins both benchmarks, but by small margins. It leads by 1.6% in Geekbench OpenCL (17,320 vs 17,039) and by 1.8% in Geekbench Vulkan (16,263 vs 15,976). The average benchmark scores are 16,792 for the 4 GB card and 16,508 for the 2 GB card.

Q: Do both cards have the same power requirements?

A: Yes. Both cards have a 30 W TDP, use no power connectors, and have a suggested PSU of 200 W. They are both single-slot designs with identical dimensions and display outputs.

Q: Are the core clocks the same?

A: Yes. Both cards have a base clock of 420 MHz and a boost clock of 1425 MHz. The memory clock is also identical at 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective), and the memory bus width is 64 bits.

Q: Which card has better percentile ranking?

A: Both cards sit at the 60th percentile of all GPUs. However, the 4 GB model has a higher average benchmark score (16,792) compared to the 2 GB model (16,508), meaning it ranks slightly higher within that percentile band.

Q: Are there any architectural differences beyond memory?

A: No. Both cards use the TU117 chip on a 12 nm process, with 4,700 million transistors, 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. They support the same APIs, including DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

The data supports a simple conclusion: the NVIDIA T400 4 GB is the superior card. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, has a higher average benchmark score, and offers double the memory capacity. The standard T400 is not a bad card — it is identical in every other way — but it loses in every measured test. If you are building a system and have the choice, the 4 GB model is the one to buy.

However, the performance gap is narrow. A 1.6% lead in OpenCL and a 1.8% lead in Vulkan are not the kind of numbers that will transform a workstation. The real advantage of the 4 GB card is the additional memory headroom, which is not directly captured in these particular benchmarks. For workloads that are memory-bound, the 4 GB card will likely pull further ahead than these scores suggest. For compute tasks that fit within 2 GB of memory, the two cards will perform nearly identically.

The standard T400 is an end-of-life product, as is the 4 GB variant. Both were released on the same date, and both are successors to Quadro Volta and predecessors to Workstation Ampere. The choice is straightforward: the 4 GB card is the better performer, and the only reason to pick the 2 GB card would be if it were available at a significantly lower price — but that is outside the scope of this analysis.

Specification Differences

The two cards are virtually identical, with only one specification differing between them. Here is the full list of fields where they diverge:

• Memory Size: The NVIDIA T400 4 GB has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the NVIDIA T400 has 2 GB of GDDR6 memory. This is the sole hardware difference.

All other specifications are shared between the two cards. They both use the TU117 chip, a 12 nm process, and have 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. The base and boost clocks are identical at 420 MHz and 1425 MHz, respectively. The memory type is GDDR6 with a 64-bit bus and 80.00 GB/s bandwidth for both. Shading units, TMUs, and ROPs are all the same at 384, 24, and 16, respectively. Pixel rate, texture rate, FP32, and FP16 performance are also equal. Both cards draw 30 W, are single-slot, use no power connectors, and have a suggested PSU of 200 W. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16, and both have three mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The API support, production status, release date, predecessor, and successor are all identical.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA T400 4 GB wins in every benchmark category where data is available. It takes the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 17,320 versus the T400’s 17,039, and it wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with 16,263 versus 15,976. There is no test in the data where the standard T400 comes out ahead. This makes the 4 GB card the clear choice for any workload that is captured by these synthetic benchmarks, which typically reflect compute and graphics API performance.

The standard T400’s only advantage is theoretical. Because it has the same core configuration and clocks, it will perform identically to the 4 GB card in tasks that do not require more than 2 GB of memory. In such scenarios, the benchmark delta of 1.6% to 1.8% is within run-to-run variance, and real-world performance will be indistinguishable. However, this is not a "win" in the data — it is a tie in a subset of workloads.

For users who need to run larger datasets, shaders, or textures that exceed 2 GB, the 4 GB card is the only viable option. The extra memory is the deciding factor, even if the benchmark scores do not fully reflect it. The 4 GB model is the better investment for future-proofing, as memory requirements tend to grow over time. The standard T400 is adequate for light workstation duties, but the 4 GB variant is the one that offers a measurable performance edge and greater capacity headroom. Choose the 4 GB card unless you are absolutely certain your workloads will never exceed 2 GB of memory usage.