OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v1.0: technical specifications plus authentic consumer ratings, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v1.0

NVIDIA Quadro M4000 Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£160VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):120 W

NVIDIA Quadro M4000 Review: Compare 118 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

NVIDIA Quadro M4000
4.6/10

Overall score

Score
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the graphics card's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best graphics cards on the market.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

90%

4.3

Technical score

10%

7.4

User score

▼Worse than 91% of graphics cards
6.1

Value for money

Value for money
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components

70%

4.6

Overall score

30%

9.7

Price

▼Worse than 89%
4.3

Technical score

Technical score
4.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

44%

2.2

Performance

24%

4.6

Memory

12%

6.9

Power & Cooling

11%

6.3

Platform & Features

5%

8.6

Design

4%

7.9

Connectivity & Media

▼Worse than 91%
7.4

User score

User score
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 94% of models
Score components

70%

7.7

User ratings

30%

6.5

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
▼Worse than 94%
  • nvidia-quadro-m4000
  • nvidia-quadro-m4000
  • nvidia-quadro-m4000
  • nvidia-quadro-m4000
nvidia-quadro-m4000
nvidia-quadro-m4000
nvidia-quadro-m4000
nvidia-quadro-m4000
Best prices
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Graphics cards model ranking

Ranked #1146 of 2,195 models in Graphics cards (Overall score)

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA Quadro M4000

Technical score
Technical score
4.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components:

44%

2.2

Performance

24%

4.6

Memory

12%

6.9

Power & Cooling

11%

6.3

Platform & Features

5%

8.6

Design

4%

7.9

Connectivity & Media

4.3
User score
User score
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 94% of models
Score components

70%

7.7

User ratings

30%

6.5

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
7.4
Popularity
Popularity
6.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you prefer a graphics card that has already been chosen and reviewed by many other users.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 62% of models
Popularity:
NVIDIA Quadro M4000 has a popularity score of 6.5 points, which is higher than that of 61.9% of products in this category.
6.5
Value for money
Value for money
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components:

70%

4.6

Overall score

30%

9.7

Price

6.1
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
2095 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 2095 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 95.3% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.2% of graphics cards and equal to 16.8% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
6,674 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 6,674 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 91.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
2,657 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 2,657 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 93.4% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
2.6 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 2.6 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 93.9% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 57.5% of graphics cards and equal to 25.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
GDDR version
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.9% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
256 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 256 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 49.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 35.9% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
192 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 192 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 87.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.6% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.7% of graphics cards and equal to 20.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 23.4% of graphics cards and equal to 76.6% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.7% of graphics cards and equal to 79.3% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 1.9% of graphics cards and equal to 98.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 8.3% of graphics cards and equal to 88.9% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
4096x2160
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 4096x2160, which is lower than that of 92.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.4% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
4
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 4 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 97.8% of graphics cards and equal to 2.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.2, which is older than on 93.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
17.28 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 17.28 Gbps, which is slower than on 57.2% of graphics cards and equal to 1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
120 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 120 W, which is lower than that of 83% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.3% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
120 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 120 W under peak load, which is lower than 85.5% of graphics cards and equal to 1.5% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
350 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 350 W PSU, which is lower than that of 93.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.2% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
120 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 120 W, which is lower than that of 85.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.4% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
120 W
Show more
Size
241x 111x 18 mm
Length
241 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >350 mm
This graphics card is 241 mm long, which is shorter than 75% of graphics cards and equal in length to 1.7% of graphics cards.
Height
111.2 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 111.2 mm tall, which is shorter than 80% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.7% of graphics cards.
Slot width
1 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 1 slot/s, which is slimmer than 96.1% of graphics cards and equal in width to 3.9% of graphics cards.
Weight
475 g
Market range: <500 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 475 g, which is lighter than 92.7% of graphics cards and equal in weight to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more

NVIDIA Quadro M4000 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 46.2% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (350 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    350 W vs 650 W
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 44.2% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (120 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    120 W vs 215 W
  • 1.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (1 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    1 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 1 more DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has more DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (4 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    4 vs 3
  • 13.8 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111.2 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111.2 mm vs 125 mm
  • 44 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (241 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    241 mm vs 285 mm
  • 46.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (120 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    120 W vs 225 W
  • 3.31x cheaper
    NVIDIA Quadro M4000 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£160 vs £530).
    £160 vs £530
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 3 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (3 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    3 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 1 more DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has more DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (4 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    4 vs 3
  • More NVENC sessions
    This graphics card has more concurrent NVENC sessions than the average graphics card (Unlimited vs 8). The average graphics card has 8 concurrent NVENC sessions.
    Unlimited vs 8
  • 46.2% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (350 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    350 W vs 650 W
  • 44.2% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (120 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    120 W vs 215 W
  • 46.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (120 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    120 W vs 225 W
  • 12 °C higher thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a higher thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (83 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    83 °C vs 95 °C
  • 1.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (1 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    1 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 13.8 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111.2 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111.2 mm vs 125 mm
  • 44 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (241 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    241 mm vs 285 mm
  • 53.5% lighter card weight
    This graphics card is lighter than the average graphics card (475 g vs 1021 g). The average graphics card weighs 1021 g.
    475 g vs 1,021 g
  • 59.6% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1013 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,013 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 27 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (13 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    13 vs 40
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • 59.7% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (773 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    773 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 78.9% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (80.4 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    80.4 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 17.1% worse value for money
    NVIDIA Quadro M4000 has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.14 vs 7.2).
    6.14 vs 7.2
  • 8.6% lower user score
    User score
    7.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
    When it matters
    When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
    Score distribution
    ▼▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    NVIDIA Quadro M4000
    the average graphics card
    NVIDIA Quadro M4000 has a lower user score than the average graphics card (7.37 vs 8.000).
    7.37 vs 8
  • 59.6% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1013 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,013 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 27 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (13 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    13 vs 40
  • 59.7% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (773 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    773 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 78.9% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (80.4 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    80.4 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 69.7% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (49.5 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    49.47 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 80 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (104 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    104 vs 184
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 88.6% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (2.6 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    2.57 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 70.5% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (6674 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    6,674 points vs 22,653 points
  • 85.7% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (2095 points vs 14678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14678.5 points.
    2,095 points vs 14,678.5 points
  • 88.7% lower compute throughput
    This graphics card has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (2.6 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 22.98 TFLOPS.
    2.6 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS
  • 78% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (2657 points vs 12074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12074 points.
    2,657 points vs 12,074 points
  • 83.3% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.08 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 2,688 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,664 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,664 vs 4,352
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 68.4% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (6008 MHz vs 19000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19000 MHz.
    6,008 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 57.1% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (192 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    192 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 91.7% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (2 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    2 MB vs 24 MB
  • 14.2% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1502 MHz vs 1750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1750 MHz.
    1,502 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 62.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (48 vs 128). The average graphics card has 128 L1 cache.
    48 vs 128
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • 8 older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2015 vs 2023).
    June 2015
    2,015 vs 2,023
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3.0 vs 4.0
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • Worse SAM support
    This graphics card offers worse SAM support than the average graphics card (no vs yes).
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (5 vs 6.8).
    5.0 vs 6.8
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • Older encoder generation
    This graphics card uses an older encoder generation than the average graphics card (7 vs 8). The average graphics card uses encoder generation 8.
    7 vs 8
  • 77.3% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (5200 million vs 22900 million). The average graphics card has 22900 million transistors.
    5,200 million vs 22,900 million
  • 34.9% larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (398 mm² vs 295 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 295 mm².
    398 mm² vs 295 mm²
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • No VRR support
    This graphics card does not support VRR, the average graphics card does.
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
    1.2 vs 1.4a
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2 vs 2.1).
    2.0 vs 2.1
  • Narrower encode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware encode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Narrower decode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware decode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/MPEG-2/VC-1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1).
    H.264/MPEG-2/VC-1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (1 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    1 vs 6
  • No HDMI output
    This graphics card does not include HDMI output, the average graphics card does.
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (4096x2160 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    4096x2160 vs 7680x4320
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No overclocking support
    This graphics card does not support overclocking, the average graphics card does.
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 15 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (82 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    82 °C vs 67 °C
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

E
engineering.com
08/02/2016
Summary of the review
Quadro M4000—CAD Applications Can't Handle This Much Power - Engineering.com
P
professional-workstation.com
26/11/2015
Summary of the review
Digging into the Quadro M4000 - Professional Workstation
K
kitguru.net
30/12/2015
Summary of the review
NVIDIA Quadro M4000 Review - KitGuru

Third-party reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
Reviews last updated: June 2026 · How we calculate this

What we like about NVIDIA Quadro M4000

  • High VRAM capacity (8GB GDDR5) makes it effective for large data sets, professional rendering, and video editing.
  • Single-slot form factor allows for better flexibility and space-saving in compact workstations.
  • Supports up to four 4K displays natively via DisplayPort 1.2, which is ideal for multi-monitor professional setups.
  • Stability and reliability in professional applications like CAD, 3D animation, and scientific research.
  • Power-efficient Maxwell architecture with a relatively low 120W TDP compared to higher-end workstation cards.
  • Excellent budget-friendly alternative for high VRAM needs on the used market compared to modern workstation GPUs.

What we don't like about NVIDIA Quadro M4000

  • Poor gaming performance-to-price ratio; often outperformed by cheaper consumer-grade GeForce cards like the GTX 1060.
  • Locked low GPU clock speed (772 MHz) limits its effectiveness for high-frame-rate gaming or modern AAA titles.
  • Requires a 6-pin power connector, which may necessitate power supply upgrades or adapters for some standard office PCs.
  • Certain creative software like Adobe Premiere Pro and After Effects may not fully leverage the card's potential performance.
  • Older Maxwell architecture (released in 2015) lacks modern features like real-time Ray Tracing found in RTX series cards.
  • Reports of inconsistent packaging and missing accessories (like DP to DVI adapters) when purchased from some third-party sellers.

Verdict

The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 is a professional-grade workstation graphics card built on the 28nm Maxwell 2.0 architecture, featuring 1664 CUDA cores and 8GB of GDDR5 memory with a 256-bit interface providing 192 GB/s bandwidth. It is designed for demanding visualization workloads like CAD and 3D rendering, offering a single-slot form factor with a 120W TDP and support for up to four 4K displays via DisplayPort 1.2. Key advantages include its generous 8GB frame buffer for large datasets, ISV certifications for professional stability, and a slim design that fits into space-constrained systems. However, its main drawbacks are its aging architecture with a relatively low base clock of 773 MHz, lack of native HDMI ports, and significantly lower performance in modern gaming compared to consumer GeForce equivalents like the GTX 970 or 1060.

Compare NVIDIA Quadro M4000 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA Quadro M4000 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found