FirePro M4000 vs Quadro FX 4800
In this comparison between FirePro M4000 and Quadro FX 4800 you will find out which graphics card performs better in today's games. Bear in mind that third-party versions may have more efficient cooling and higher clock speeds. This will increase cards' performance, though not by much. In addition to raw power you should also take into account the dimensions. Thicker models simply will not fit into a small mini-ITX case. The resolution of your monitor also affects the choice, since 4K gameplay requires a more powerful GPU. And don't overspend on the graphics card. Other parts of your build may also need to be upgraded, save some money for the CPU or power supply. For some people FirePro M4000 will be the best choice, for others Quadro FX 4800 will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
Quadro FX 4800
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 | Quadro FX 4800 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 33 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 1536 MB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video |
| Check Price |
- Quadro FX 4800 has 354% more power consumption, than FirePro M4000.
- FirePro M4000 is connected by MXM-A (3.0), and Quadro FX 4800 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- Quadro FX 4800 has 1535 GB more memory, than FirePro M4000.
- FirePro M4000 is used in Mobile workstations, and Quadro FX 4800 - in Desktops.
- FirePro M4000 is build with GCN architecture, and Quadro FX 4800 - with Tesla 2.0.
- Core clock speed of Quadro FX 4800 is 2 MHz higher, than FirePro M4000.
- FirePro M4000 is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Quadro FX 4800 - by 55 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of FirePro M4000 is 2900 MHz higher, than Quadro FX 4800.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 2−3 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 12−14 |
| medium / 1080p | 9−10 | 3−4 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 100% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−12 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 5−6 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Battlefield 5 is 125% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 40−45 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| FirePro M4000 and Quadro FX 4800 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
| low / 768p | 140−150 | 120−130 |
| medium / 768p | 120−130 | 90−95 |
| ultra / 1080p | 55−60 | 35−40 |
| QHD / 1440p | 30−35 | 21−24 |
| 4K / 2160p | 27−30 | 16−18 |
| high / 768p | 90−95 | 65−70 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 33% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 55−60 | 65−70 |
| ultra / 1080p | 21−24 | 18−20 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro FX 4800 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 4% more, than FirePro M4000. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | 65−70 | 45−50 |
| ultra / 1080p | 35−40 | 20−22 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Dota 2 is 33% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 9−10 | 2−3 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 2−3 |
| 4K / 2160p | 4−5 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 10−11 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−11 | 3−4 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Far Cry 5 is 175% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−12 | 5−6 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 3−4 |
| low / 720p | 65−70 | 50−55 |
| medium / 1080p | 27−30 | 10−11 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Fortnite is 63% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | 5−6 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 2−3 | 3−4 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 16−18 |
| medium / 1080p | 16−18 | 8−9 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Forza Horizon 4 is 87% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 55−60 | 45−50 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | − |
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | 4−5 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 2−3 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | − | 35−40 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Grand Theft Auto V is 44% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 5−6 | 1−2 |
| ultra / 1080p | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 4−5 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 3−4 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Metro Exodus is 200% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 95−100 | 90−95 |
| high / 1080p | 90−95 | 80−85 |
| ultra / 1080p | 80−85 | 70−75 |
| medium / 1080p | 95−100 | 85−90 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Minecraft is 10% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| 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 Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | − |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 6−7 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−12 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 150% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 27−30 | 9−10 |
| medium / 768p | 18−20 | 8−9 |
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | 4−5 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 3−4 |
| 4K / 2160p | 6−7 | 1−2 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 180% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 70−75 |
| medium / 768p | 45−50 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 21−24 | 12−14 |
| high / 768p | 35−40 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M4000 in World of Tanks is 26% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
Full Specs
| FirePro M4000 | Quadro FX 4800 | |
| Architecture | GCN | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | Cape Verde GLM | GT200B |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 1 July 2012 | 11 November 2008 |
| Pipelines | 512 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 602 MHz |
| Transistor count | 1,500 million | 1,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 21.60 | 38.53 |
| Floating-point performance | 691.2 gflops | 462.3 gflops |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 4500 MHz | 1600 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 72 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | 1.3 | |
| Bus support | n/a | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 79 Mh/s | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Form factor | MXM-A | |
| StereoOutput3D | + | |
| Check Price |