FireStream 9370 vs Quadro K4000M
In this comparison between FireStream 9370 and Quadro K4000M 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 FireStream 9370 will be the best choice, for others Quadro K4000M will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
FireStream 9370
Quadro K4000M is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Quadro K4000M 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 Quadro K4000M here:
Main Specs
FireStream 9370 | Quadro K4000M | |
Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | 100 Watt |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
Display Connectors | 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
Check Price |
- FireStream 9370 has 125% more power consumption, than Quadro K4000M.
- FireStream 9370 is connected by PCIe 2.0 x16, and Quadro K4000M uses MXM-B (3.0) interface.
- FireStream 9370 and Quadro K4000M have maximum RAM of 4 GB.
- FireStream 9370 is used in Desktops, and Quadro K4000M - in Mobile workstations.
- FireStream 9370 is build with TeraScale 2 architecture, and Quadro K4000M - with Kepler.
- Core clock speed of FireStream 9370 is 225 MHz higher, than Quadro K4000M.
- FireStream 9370 is manufactured by 40 nm process technology, and Quadro K4000M - by 28 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of FireStream 9370 is 1800 MHz higher, than Quadro K4000M.
Game benchmarks
high / 1080p | 12−14 | 10−11 |
ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 6−7 |
QHD / 1440p | 2−3 | 1−2 |
low / 720p | 27−30 | 21−24 |
medium / 1080p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 30% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
high / 1080p | 21−24 | 16−18 |
ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 14−16 |
QHD / 1440p | 4−5 | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 45−50 | 35−40 |
medium / 1080p | 21−24 | 18−20 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in Battlefield 5 is 22% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
low / 768p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
FireStream 9370 and Quadro K4000M have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
low / 768p | 190−200 | 170−180 |
medium / 768p | 160−170 | 140−150 |
ultra / 1080p | 85−90 | 70−75 |
QHD / 1440p | 45−50 | 40−45 |
4K / 2160p | 30−33 | 30−33 |
high / 768p | 120−130 | 110−120 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 12% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
low / 768p | 55−60 | 55−60 |
ultra / 1080p | 35−40 | 27−30 |
medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 6% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
low / 768p | 100−110 | 95−100 |
medium / 768p | 85−90 | 75−80 |
ultra / 1080p | 55−60 | 45−50 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in Dota 2 is 12% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
high / 1080p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 10−12 |
4K / 2160p | 5−6 | 4−5 |
low / 720p | 30−35 | 27−30 |
medium / 1080p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in Far Cry 5 is 21% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
high / 1080p | 21−24 | 18−20 |
ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 14−16 |
QHD / 1440p | 16−18 | − |
low / 720p | 85−90 | 75−80 |
medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 35−40 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in Fortnite is 16% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
high / 1080p | 21−24 | 18−20 |
ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 14−16 |
QHD / 1440p | 7−8 | 4−5 |
low / 720p | 45−50 | 35−40 |
medium / 1080p | 24−27 | 20−22 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in Forza Horizon 4 is 26% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
low / 768p | 75−80 | 65−70 |
medium / 768p | 65−70 | 60−65 |
high / 1080p | 24−27 | 20−22 |
ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | 9−10 |
QHD / 1440p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in Grand Theft Auto V is 12% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
high / 1080p | 8−9 | 7−8 |
ultra / 1080p | 6−7 | 5−6 |
4K / 2160p | 2−3 | 1−2 |
low / 720p | 24−27 | 20−22 |
medium / 1080p | 10−12 | 9−10 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in Metro Exodus is 11% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
low / 768p | 100−110 | 100−110 |
ultra / 1080p | 95−100 | 90−95 |
medium / 1080p | 100−110 | 95−100 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in Minecraft is 4% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
high / 1080p | 21−24 | 18−20 |
ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 14−16 |
low / 720p | 50−55 | 40−45 |
medium / 1080p | 21−24 | 20−22 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 16% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
high / 1080p | 12−14 | 12−14 |
ultra / 1080p | 9−10 | 8−9 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 24−27 | 18−20 |
medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 15% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
low / 768p | 45−50 | 35−40 |
medium / 768p | 27−30 | 24−27 |
high / 1080p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
ultra / 1080p | 9−10 | 8−9 |
4K / 2160p | 7−8 | 7−8 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 22% more, than Quadro K4000M. | ||
low / 768p | 95−100 | 90−95 |
medium / 768p | 55−60 | 50−55 |
ultra / 1080p | 30−35 | 27−30 |
high / 768p | 50−55 | 45−50 |
The average gaming FPS of FireStream 9370 in World of Tanks is 9% more, than Quadro K4000M. |
Full Specs
FireStream 9370 | Quadro K4000M | |
Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Kepler |
Code name | Cypress | N14E-Q3 |
Type | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
Release date | 23 June 2010 | 1 June 2012 |
Pipelines | 1600 | 960 |
Core clock speed | 825 MHz | 600 MHz |
Transistor count | 2,154 million | 3,540 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
Texture fill rate | 66.00 | 48.08 |
Floating-point performance | 2,640.0 gflops | 1,154 gflops |
Length | 267 mm | |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 4600 MHz | 2800 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 147.2 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |
Shared memory | - | |
DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
Shader Model | 5.0 | 5.1 |
OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Vulkan | N/A | 1.1.126 |
CUDA | + | |
Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 37 Mh/s | |
Laptop size | large | |
Optimus | + | |
Check Price |
Similar compares
- FireStream 9370 vs GeForce GTX 285M SLI
- FireStream 9370 vs GeForce GTX 460 768MB
- Quadro K4000M vs GeForce GTX 285M SLI
- Quadro K4000M vs GeForce GTX 460 768MB
- FireStream 9370 vs Radeon RX Vega 11
- FireStream 9370 vs Radeon RX Vega 6 Ryzen 2000 3000
- Quadro K4000M vs Radeon RX Vega 11
- Quadro K4000M vs Radeon RX Vega 6 Ryzen 2000 3000