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 GTX 970XM FORCE

2014

Why buy it

✅Draws 81W instead of 100W, a 19W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro M4000 across 35 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Poor future-proofing: 2014-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 8.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $791 MSRP).
❌10.8% longer card at 267mm vs 241mm.

Quadro M4000

2015

Why buy it

✅25.0% more average FPS across 35 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 8.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($791 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
✅Measures 241mm instead of 267mm, a 26mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌23.5% higher power demand at 100W vs 81W.

GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE

2014

Quadro M4000

2015

Why buy it

✅Draws 81W instead of 100W, a 19W reduction.

Why buy it

✅25.0% more average FPS across 35 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 8.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($791 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
✅Measures 241mm instead of 267mm, a 26mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro M4000 across 35 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Poor future-proofing: 2014-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 8.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $791 MSRP).
❌10.8% longer card at 267mm vs 241mm.

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌23.5% higher power demand at 100W vs 81W.

Quick Answers

So, is Quadro M4000 better than GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE?

Yes. Quadro M4000 is the better GPU overall here. You are getting 25.0% more average FPS across 35 tracked games in our benchmark data, 0.4% higher PassMark G3D performance, and 8 GB vs 4 GB of VRAM. It also comes from 2015 instead of 2014, which helps its case as the more complete modern gaming card.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE is the safer long-term GPU choice because it gives you the stronger overall hardware and feature outlook for modern games.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?

Quadro M4000 is the smarter buy today, but it is not as lopsided as a simple winner label makes it sound. Quadro M4000 is priced in an unclear MSRP range at $791 MSRP versus an unclear MSRP, and you are getting 25.0% more estimated average FPS across 35 tracked games in our benchmark data and a lower G3D Mark (6,679 vs 6,707). It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 100+%. GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE is the more forward-looking alternative, so it still has a real case if you care more about lower power draw (81W vs 100W) and future-proofing than about squeezing out the strongest gaming value today.

When does GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE make more sense than Quadro M4000?

Yes. GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE is still an excellent gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. It makes more sense if your priority is lower power draw (81W vs 100W), future-proofing, and staying closer to an unclear MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of Quadro M4000. The trade-off is that Quadro M4000 currently gives you a lower G3D Mark (6,679 vs 6,707) and 25.0% more estimated average FPS across 35 tracked games in our benchmark data. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 100+%.

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.

GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE Benchmark Check

Quadro M4000 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE	Quadro M4000
1080p
low	78 FPS	105 FPS
medium	67 FPS	88 FPS
high	54 FPS	72 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	48 FPS
1440p
low	69 FPS	89 FPS
medium	59 FPS	73 FPS
high	42 FPS	54 FPS
ultra	27 FPS	35 FPS
4K
low	25 FPS	35 FPS
medium	23 FPS	32 FPS
high	15 FPS	20 FPS
ultra	13 FPS	17 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE Open Quadro M4000

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE	Quadro M4000
1080p
low	156 FPS	161 FPS
medium	127 FPS	137 FPS
high	102 FPS	111 FPS
ultra	70 FPS	78 FPS
1440p
low	108 FPS	110 FPS
medium	82 FPS	88 FPS
high	65 FPS	70 FPS
ultra	44 FPS	51 FPS
4K
low	47 FPS	49 FPS
medium	38 FPS	42 FPS
high	35 FPS	38 FPS
ultra	25 FPS	30 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE Open Quadro M4000

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE	Quadro M4000
1080p
low	302 FPS	301 FPS
medium	241 FPS	240 FPS
high	201 FPS	200 FPS
ultra	151 FPS	150 FPS
1440p
low	226 FPS	225 FPS
medium	181 FPS	180 FPS
high	151 FPS	150 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	113 FPS
4K
low	151 FPS	150 FPS
medium	121 FPS	120 FPS
high	89 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	75 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE Open Quadro M4000

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE	Quadro M4000
1080p
low	135 FPS	211 FPS
medium	110 FPS	182 FPS
high	95 FPS	148 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	125 FPS
1440p
low	98 FPS	164 FPS
medium	81 FPS	143 FPS
high	70 FPS	113 FPS
ultra	57 FPS	93 FPS
4K
low	59 FPS	92 FPS
medium	45 FPS	73 FPS
high	35 FPS	58 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	46 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE Open Quadro M4000

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE and Quadro M4000

GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE

The GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 7 2014. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 924 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 81W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,707 points. Launch price was $2,560.89.

Quadro M4000

The Quadro M4000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 18 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 975 MHz to 1013 MHz. It has 1,280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,679 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE scores 6,707 and the Quadro M4000 reaches 6,679 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro M4000 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,280 (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE) vs 1 (Quadro M4000). Raw compute: 2.657 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE) vs 2.496 TFLOPS (Quadro M4000). Boost clocks: 1038 MHz vs 1013 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE	Quadro M4000
G3D Mark Score	6,707	6,679
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0	Maxwell 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1280	1,280
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.657 TFLOPS+6%	2.496 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1038 MHz+2%	1013 MHz
ROPs	48	64+33%
TMUs	80	80
L1 Cache	480 KB	480 KB
L2 Cache	1.5 MB	2 MB+33%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Quadro M4000 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE	Quadro M4000
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M4000 has 8 GB. The Quadro M4000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 120 GB/s (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE) vs 211 GB/s (Quadro M4000) — a 75.8% advantage for the Quadro M4000. Bus width: 192-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE) vs 2 MB (Quadro M4000) — the Quadro M4000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE	Quadro M4000
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	120 GB/s	211 GB/s+76%
Bus Width	192-bit	256-bit+33%
L2 Cache	1.5 MB	2 MB+33%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE) vs 12 (12_1) (Quadro M4000). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE	Quadro M4000
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Vulkan	1.4	1.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE) vs 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M4000). Decoder: 1st Gen NVDEC vs 1st Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,HEVC,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Quadro M4000).

Feature	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE	Quadro M4000
Encoder	5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell)	5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell)
Decoder	1st Gen NVDEC	1st Gen NVDEC
Codecs	H.264,HEVC,VC-1,MPEG-2	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE draws 81W versus the Quadro M4000's 100W — a 21% difference. The GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE) vs 350W (Quadro M4000). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 241mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 82°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE	Quadro M4000
TDP	81W-19%	100W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	1x 6-pin	PCIe-powered
Length	267mm	241mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	1-50%
Temp (Load)	75°C-9%	82°C
Perf/Watt	82.8+24%	66.8