FirePro M4000 vs GeForce GTX 295
Find out if it is worth upgrading your current GPU setup by comparing FirePro M4000 and GeForce GTX 295. Here you can take a closer look at graphics cards specs, such as core clock speed, memory type and size, display connectors, etc. The price, overall benchmark and gaming performances are usually defining factors when it comes to choosing between FirePro M4000 and GeForce GTX 295. Make sure that the graphics card has compatible dimensions and will properly fit in your new or current computer case. Also these graphics cards may have different system power recommendations, so take that into consideration and upgrade your PSU if necessary.
GeForce GTX 295
FirePro M4000 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: FirePro M4000 is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with FirePro M4000 here:
Main Specs
| FirePro M4000 | GeForce GTX 295 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 33 Watt | 289 Watt |
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 6-pin & 8-pin |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 1792 MB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI |
| Check Price |
- GeForce GTX 295 has 775% more power consumption, than FirePro M4000.
- FirePro M4000 is connected by MXM-A (3.0), and GeForce GTX 295 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- GeForce GTX 295 has 1791 GB more memory, than FirePro M4000.
- FirePro M4000 is used in Mobile workstations, and GeForce GTX 295 - in Desktops.
- FirePro M4000 is build with GCN architecture, and GeForce GTX 295 - with Tesla 2.0.
- Core clock speed of GeForce GTX 295 is 642 MHz higher, than FirePro M4000.
- FirePro M4000 is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and GeForce GTX 295 - by 55 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of FirePro M4000 is 3501 MHz higher, than GeForce GTX 295.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 2−3 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 9−10 | 5−6 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 66% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−12 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 18−20 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 8−9 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Battlefield 5 is 63% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 30−35 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 17% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 140−150 | 120−130 |
| medium / 768p | 120−130 | 90−95 |
| ultra / 1080p | 55−60 | 40−45 |
| QHD / 1440p | 30−35 | 24−27 |
| 4K / 2160p | 27−30 | 18−20 |
| high / 768p | 90−95 | 65−70 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 29% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 55−60 | 80−85 |
| ultra / 1080p | 21−24 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 295 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 9% more, than FirePro M4000. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | 65−70 | 50−55 |
| ultra / 1080p | 35−40 | 27−30 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Dota 2 is 23% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 9−10 | 5−6 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 4−5 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−11 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Far Cry 5 is 57% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−12 | 7−8 |
| low / 720p | 65−70 | 50−55 |
| medium / 1080p | 27−30 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Fortnite is 40% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | 7−8 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 20−22 |
| medium / 1080p | 16−18 | 9−10 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Forza Horizon 4 is 66% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 55−60 | 45−50 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | − |
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | 8−9 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 5−6 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | − | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Grand Theft Auto V is 30% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 5−6 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 3−4 | 1−2 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 8−9 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 4−5 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Metro Exodus is 75% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 95−100 | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | 90−95 | 85−90 |
| ultra / 1080p | 80−85 | 80−85 |
| medium / 1080p | 95−100 | 85−90 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Minecraft is 6% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 35−40 | 27−30 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 27% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 8−9 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−12 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 37% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 27−30 | 16−18 |
| medium / 768p | 18−20 | 12−14 |
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | 6−7 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 5−6 |
| 4K / 2160p | 6−7 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 60% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 70−75 |
| medium / 768p | 45−50 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 21−24 | 16−18 |
| high / 768p | 35−40 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in World of Tanks is 23% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
Full Specs
| FirePro M4000 | GeForce GTX 295 | |
| Architecture | GCN | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | Cape Verde GLM | GT200B |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 July 2012 | 8 January 2009 |
| Pipelines | 512 | 240 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 1242 MHz |
| Transistor count | 1,500 million | 1,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 21.60 | 92.2 billion/sec |
| Floating-point performance | 691.2 gflops | 2x 596.2 gflops |
| Length | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 896 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 4500 MHz | 999 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 72 GB/s | 223.8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | + | |
| CUDA cores | 480 | |
| Bus support | n/a | |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
| SLI options | + | |
| Multi monitor support | + | |
| HDMI | + | |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 79 Mh/s | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Form factor | MXM-A | |
| StereoOutput3D | + | |
| CUDA cores per GPU | 240 | |
| Standard memory config per GPU | 896 MB | |
| Memory interface width per GPU | 448 Bit | |
| High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR) | 128bit | |
| Check Price |