AMD FirePro W4190M vs NVIDIA Quadro K2000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison recorded in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this test, the AMD FirePro W4190M scores 4505, while the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 scores 4071. The FirePro W4190M wins this head-to-head by a margin of 10.7%. That is a decisive gap for a single compute workload, and it places the AMD part clearly ahead of the NVIDIA part in raw OpenCL performance.

Looking at the broader database context, the FirePro W4190M sits at the 26th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 4505. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon R7 M260 at 4499, which is 0.1% slower, and the Intel HD Graphics P530 at 4560, which is 1.2% faster. The AMD Radeon RX 560 is 1.4% faster at 4569, and the AMD Radeon R5 M230 is 1.6% faster at 4577. So the FirePro W4190M lands in a tight cluster of low-end and integrated graphics parts, but it holds its own within that group. It is not a top performer by any means, but it is not at the bottom of the stack either.

The NVIDIA Quadro K2000, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 3964 across all recorded tests, and it sits at the 24th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals show a very similar picture: the NVIDIA GeForce 830M is 0.2% faster at 3957, the AMD Radeon R5 M420 is 0.2% faster at 3956, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M is 0.3% faster at 3953, and the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 is 0.3% slower at 3977. The Quadro K2000 is therefore clustered with a set of mid-2010s mobile and low-end desktop parts, and it is essentially at parity with all of them. None of these rivals are more than a fraction of a percent away, which means the Quadro K2000 is a thoroughly average performer in its peer group.

The FirePro W4190M also has additional benchmark data beyond the OpenCL test? No, the database records only one benchmark for the AMD part: the Geekbench OpenCL score of 4505. The NVIDIA Quadro K2000, however, has three recorded benchmarks: Geekbench Metal at 3630, Geekbench OpenCL at 4071, and Geekbench Vulkan at 4191. The OpenCL score is the only one that can be compared directly between the two cards, and in that test the AMD part leads by 10.7%. The Quadro K2000's Vulkan score of 4191 is higher than its OpenCL score, but the FirePro W4190M has no recorded Vulkan result, so no comparison is possible there. Similarly, the Quadro K2000's Metal score of 3630 is its lowest recorded result, but the FirePro W4190M has no Metal result in the database.

The wins tally in the head-to-head section is 1 for the AMD FirePro W4190M and 0 for the NVIDIA Quadro K2000. That reflects the single comparable benchmark result. The data does not support a claim that the AMD card wins in every possible workload, but in the one recorded test where both cards appear, the AMD part is clearly ahead. The 10.7% delta is significant enough to matter in compute-oriented tasks, especially for users who rely on OpenCL acceleration in professional applications.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the AMD FirePro W4190M is the stronger choice for anyone whose workload depends on OpenCL compute performance. It beats the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 by 10.7% in the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it also has a slightly higher average benchmark score (4505 versus 3964) and a higher percentile ranking (26th versus 24th). If a user is deciding between these two cards strictly on measured performance, the data points clearly to the AMD part.

The NVIDIA Quadro K2000 does have one advantage in the database: it has a recorded launch MSRP of 599 USD. The AMD FirePro W4190M has no launch MSRP listed. However, the task here is to evaluate performance data, not pricing, so the MSRP is simply noted as a fact without further commentary.

For users who need Vulkan or Metal support, the Quadro K2000 has recorded scores in both of those APIs (4191 and 3630 respectively), while the FirePro W4190M has no recorded results for either. That does not mean the AMD card lacks those capabilities; it only means the database contains no measurements for them. Users with specific Vulkan or Metal workloads should consider that the Quadro K2000 has verified results in those APIs, while the FirePro W4190M does not.

The Quadro K2000 also has a lower TDP of 51 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W, both of which are listed in the database. The FirePro W4190M has no TDP listed at all. For system builders concerned about power draw, the Quadro K2000 offers a concrete figure, while the AMD part leaves that question open.

In short: the AMD FirePro W4190M wins the only direct benchmark comparison, and it has a higher average score and percentile. The NVIDIA Quadro K2000 offers documented Vulkan and Metal results, a specific TDP, and a launch MSRP. For OpenCL-centric professional work, the data favors AMD. For users who need verified multi-API results or a known power envelope, the NVIDIA card has more recorded information.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL according to the database?

A: The AMD FirePro W4190M scores 4505 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 scores 4071. The AMD card wins by 10.7%.

Q: How does the AMD FirePro W4190M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The FirePro W4190M is 0.1% faster than the AMD Radeon R7 M260, 1.2% slower than the Intel HD Graphics P530, 1.4% slower than the AMD Radeon RX 560, and 1.6% slower than the AMD Radeon R5 M230.

Q: How does the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Quadro K2000 is 0.2% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce 830M, 0.2% slower than the AMD Radeon R5 M420, 0.3% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M, and 0.3% faster than the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 have benchmark results in APIs other than OpenCL?

A: Yes, the Quadro K2000 has a Geekbench Metal score of 3630 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 4191. The AMD FirePro W4190M has no recorded Metal or Vulkan results.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The AMD FirePro W4190M has an average benchmark score of 4505, while the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 has an average benchmark score of 3964.

Q: What are the percentile rankings for these two GPUs?

A: The AMD FirePro W4190M is at the 26th percentile among all GPUs, and the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 is at the 24th percentile.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in several measurable specifications. The AMD FirePro W4190M uses an Opal chip based on the GCN 1.0 architecture, while the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 uses a GK107 chip based on the Kepler architecture. The AMD part is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, as is the NVIDIA part. The AMD chip contains 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The NVIDIA chip contains 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 10.8M per mm².

The AMD FirePro W4190M has a base clock of 825 MHz and a boost clock of 900 MHz. The NVIDIA Quadro K2000 has no base or boost clock listed in the database. Both cards have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128 bit bus, and both have a memory bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s. The memory clock is the same for both: 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective.

The shading unit count is identical at 384 for both cards. The TMU count differs: the AMD part has 24 TMUs, while the NVIDIA part has 32. The ROP count also differs: the AMD part has 8 ROPs, while the NVIDIA part has 16. The pixel rate for the AMD card is 7.200 GPixel/s, while the NVIDIA card achieves 7.632 GPixel/s. The texture rate for the AMD card is 21.60 GTexel/s, while the NVIDIA card achieves 30.53 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance for the AMD card is 691.2 GFLOPS, while the NVIDIA card achieves 732.7 GFLOPS.

The NVIDIA Quadro K2000 has a TDP of 51 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The AMD FirePro W4190M has no TDP listed. The AMD card uses an MXM Module slot width, while the NVIDIA card is a Single-slot design. Neither card requires power connectors. The AMD card has a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface, while the NVIDIA card uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The display outputs differ: the AMD card is listed as "Portable Device Dependent," while the NVIDIA card has 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2.

The NVIDIA Quadro K2000 has physical dimensions listed: 202 mm in length and 111 mm in height. The AMD FirePro W4190M has no dimensions listed. The NVIDIA card has a launch MSRP of 599 USD; the AMD card has none listed.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between these two cards is a classic GCN versus Kepler comparison. The AMD FirePro W4190M is built on GCN 1.0, AMD's first-generation Graphics Core Next design. The NVIDIA Quadro K2000 is built on Kepler, NVIDIA's architecture that succeeded Fermi. Both are built at TSMC on a 28 nm process, but AMD achieves a higher transistor density of 12.3M per mm² versus NVIDIA's 10.8M per mm². AMD packs fewer transistors on a smaller die (950 million transistors on 77 mm², NVIDIA uses 1,270 million transistors on 118 mm²).

The compute resources tell a clear story. Both cards have 384 shading units, but the NVIDIA part has more texture units and ROPs. The NVIDIA part has 32 TMUs versus 24 on the AMD card, and 16 ROPs versus 8 on the AMD card. As a result, the NVIDIA card has higher pixel rate (7.632 GPixel/s versus 7.200 GPixel/s) and significantly higher texture rate (30.53 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s). The NVIDIA card also has higher FP32 throughput at 732.7 GFLOPS versus 691.2 GFLOPS.

The memory subsystem is identical: 2 GB of GDDR5, a 128 bit bus, 64.00 GB/s bandwidth, and the same effective memory clock. The difference in compute performance therefore comes from the GPU core itself, not from memory throughput.

The API support differs slightly. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support the same OpenGL version, but the AMD card has a higher DirectX feature level and a slightly lower Vulkan version.

The bus interface differs: the AMD card uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the NVIDIA card uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The form factor also differs, with the AMD card being an MXM Module and the NVIDIA card being a Single-slot design. The NVIDIA card is a desktop-oriented card with DVI and DisplayPort outputs, while the AMD card is designed for portable devices with display output dependent on the host system.

The generation names reflect their positioning: the AMD card belongs to the FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) generation, while the NVIDIA card belongs to the Quadro Kepler (Kx000) generation. The AMD card's predecessor is FirePro Mobility, and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile. The NVIDIA card's predecessor is Quadro Fermi, and its successor is Quadro Maxwell. Both are end-of-life products, but they come from different design philosophies: AMD's GCN architecture emphasizes compute throughput in a mobile form factor, while NVIDIA's Kepler architecture balances compute and graphics resources in a larger desktop card. The data shows that NVIDIA's additional texture and ROP resources do not translate into a higher OpenCL score; the AMD card wins that test despite having fewer TMUs and ROPs.