
GeForce 930MX
Popular choices:

Quadro 4000M
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GeForce 930MX
2016Why buy it
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 16.0 vs 0 G3D/$ ($80 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
- ✅Draws 17W instead of 100W, a 83W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: Maxwell (2014−2017) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Quadro 4000M across 25 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
Quadro 4000M
2011Why buy it
- ✅48.9% more average FPS across 25 tracked games in our benchmark data.
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2011-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 16.0 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $80 MSRP).
- ❌488.2% higher power demand at 100W vs 17W.
GeForce 930MX
2016Quadro 4000M
2011Why buy it
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 16.0 vs 0 G3D/$ ($80 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
- ✅Draws 17W instead of 100W, a 83W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: Maxwell (2014−2017) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Why buy it
- ✅48.9% more average FPS across 25 tracked games in our benchmark data.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Quadro 4000M across 25 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2011-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 16.0 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $80 MSRP).
- ❌488.2% higher power demand at 100W vs 17W.
Quick Answers
So, is Quadro 4000M better than GeForce 930MX?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does GeForce 930MX make more sense than Quadro 4000M?
Games Benchmarks
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce 930MX | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 26 FPS | 41 FPS |
| medium | 16 FPS | 33 FPS |
| high | 11 FPS | 20 FPS |
| ultra | 6 FPS | 13 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 16 FPS | 23 FPS |
| medium | 10 FPS | 17 FPS |
| high | 5 FPS | 9 FPS |
| ultra | 3 FPS | 6 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 7 FPS | 10 FPS |
| medium | 5 FPS | 8 FPS |
| high | 3 FPS | 5 FPS |
| ultra | 2 FPS | 4 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce 930MX | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 58 FPS | 58 FPS |
| medium | 35 FPS | 46 FPS |
| high | 25 FPS | 39 FPS |
| ultra | 16 FPS | 29 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 19 FPS | 43 FPS |
| medium | 12 FPS | 29 FPS |
| high | 8 FPS | 20 FPS |
| ultra | 6 FPS | 15 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 5 FPS | 18 FPS |
| medium | 3 FPS | 11 FPS |
| high | 3 FPS | 9 FPS |
| ultra | 2 FPS | 6 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce 930MX | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 58 FPS | 58 FPS |
| medium | 46 FPS | 46 FPS |
| high | 38 FPS | 39 FPS |
| ultra | 29 FPS | 29 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 43 FPS | 43 FPS |
| medium | 35 FPS | 35 FPS |
| high | 29 FPS | 29 FPS |
| ultra | 22 FPS | 22 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 29 FPS | 29 FPS |
| medium | 23 FPS | 23 FPS |
| high | 19 FPS | 19 FPS |
| ultra | 14 FPS | 14 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce 930MX | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 58 FPS | 58 FPS |
| medium | 46 FPS | 46 FPS |
| high | 38 FPS | 39 FPS |
| ultra | 29 FPS | 29 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 14 FPS | 14 FPS |
| medium | 11 FPS | 11 FPS |
| high | 10 FPS | 10 FPS |
| ultra | 8 FPS | 8 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 10 FPS | 10 FPS |
| medium | 7 FPS | 7 FPS |
| high | 6 FPS | 6 FPS |
| ultra | 5 FPS | 4 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 930MX and Quadro 4000M

GeForce 930MX
GeForce 930MX
The GeForce 930MX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 1 2016. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 952 MHz to 1020 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 17W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,278 points.

Quadro 4000M
Quadro 4000M
The Quadro 4000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 22 2011. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 475 MHz. It has 336 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,287 points. Launch price was $449.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 930MX scores 1,278 and the Quadro 4000M reaches 1,287 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 930MX is built on Maxwell while the Quadro 4000M uses Fermi, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 930MX) vs 336 (Quadro 4000M). Raw compute: 0.7834 TFLOPS (GeForce 930MX) vs 0.6384 TFLOPS (Quadro 4000M).
| Feature | GeForce 930MX | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,278 | 1,287 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Fermi |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 384+14% | 336 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7834 TFLOPS+23% | 0.6384 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 32+300% |
| TMUs | 24 | 56+133% |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 448 KB+133% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce 930MX gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Quadro 4000M relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce 930MX | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 930MX) vs 0.5 MB (Quadro 4000M) — the GeForce 930MX has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 930MX | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 0.5 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 930MX draws 17W versus the Quadro 4000M's 100W — a 141.9% difference. The GeForce 930MX is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 930MX) vs 350W (Quadro 4000M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce 930MX | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 17W-83% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | — |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 80 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 75.2+483% | 12.9 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 930MX is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2011).
| Feature | GeForce 930MX | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $80 | — |
| Codename | GM108 | GF104 |
| Release | March 1 2016 | February 22 2011 |
| Ranking | #805 | #801 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













