AMD Radeon 540 vs NVIDIA Quadro K620 Comparison

The AMD Radeon 540 and the NVIDIA Quadro K620 are both end-of-life, single-slot graphics cards aimed at different professional and entry-level desktop segments. The database shows a split decision: the Radeon 540 dominates in Vulkan compute workloads, while the Quadro K620 holds a lead in OpenCL performance. The two cards also differ fundamentally in architecture, memory configuration, and interface generation, making them suitable for distinct tasks despite their similar shading unit counts.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 540 has an average benchmark score of 7673, while the NVIDIA Quadro K620 scores 6282. The Radeon 540 sits at the 41st percentile among all GPUs, whereas the Quadro K620 is at the 36th percentile.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap between the two cards?

A: In the geekbench_vulkan test, the AMD Radeon 540 scores 9162, which is 56.1% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K620’s 5870. This is the largest single-benchmark margin in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Quadro K620 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, in geekbench_opencl the Quadro K620 scores 6693 against the Radeon 540’s 6184, a delta of 7.6% in NVIDIA’s favor. This gives each card one win in the recorded head-to-head benchmarks.

Q: What are the memory sizes and types?

A: The AMD Radeon 540 uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 32-bit bus, while the NVIDIA Quadro K620 has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus. The NVIDIA card’s larger bus width yields 28.80 GB/s bandwidth versus 24.00 GB/s for the AMD card.

Q: What process nodes and architectures do the two cards use?

A: The Radeon 540 is built on a 14 nm process using GlobalFoundries, with a GCN 4.0 architecture and the Lexa chip. The Quadro K620 uses a 28 nm TSMC process with the Maxwell architecture and GM107 chip.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The AMD Radeon 540 has a pixel rate of 18.93 GPixel/s, which is slightly higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K620’s 17.98 GPixel/s. The texture rates are also close: 28.39 GTexel/s for AMD versus 26.98 GTexel/s for NVIDIA.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 540 is the clear choice for Vulkan-based applications. Its geekbench_vulkan score of 9162 represents a 56.1% advantage over the Quadro K620, a massive margin that indicates superior driver optimization or hardware scheduling for modern compute APIs. This makes the Radeon 540 better suited for workloads that leverage Vulkan’s low-overhead features, such as game engines, ray tracing frameworks (though no RT cores are present), or compute shaders that run under Vulkan. The card’s 14 nm process and GCN 4.0 architecture also suggest better energy efficiency per clock, though the database does not list clock speeds for the AMD part.

The NVIDIA Quadro K620 wins in OpenCL. Its score of 6693 beats the Radeon 540’s 6184 by 7.6%. This advantage may stem from the Quadro’s 128-bit memory bus, which provides 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, or from NVIDIA’s mature OpenCL compiler for Maxwell. For legacy OpenCL compute tasks, medical imaging, or CAD plugins that rely on OpenCL kernels, the Quadro K620 is the safer pick. Additionally, the Quadro K620 has a higher base clock of 1058 MHz and a boost clock of 1124 MHz, which helps in sustained workloads where the Radeon 540’s clocks are not recorded.

In raw throughput metrics, the two cards are nearly identical. Both have 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Radeon 540 edges ahead in pixel rate (18.93 vs 17.98 GPixel/s) and texture rate (28.39 vs 26.98 GTexel/s), but these are modest differences. The Quadro K620 has a higher FP32 compute rating of 863.2 GFLOPS against the Radeon 540’s 908.5 GFLOPS, meaning the AMD card actually leads in peak FP32 by about 5%. However, the Quadro’s OpenCL win suggests that real-world performance depends on the workload and API.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 540 uses the GCN 4.0 architecture, a mature design that powers many Polaris-generation cards. The chip is named Lexa, and the generation is listed as Polaris (RX 500). GCN 4.0 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The card is fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die. This gives a transistor density of 21.4 million per mm², which is high for its time. GCN 4.0 is known for strong async compute and good compute throughput, which explains the Vulkan score advantage.

The NVIDIA Quadro K620 uses the Maxwell architecture, specifically the GM107 chip. Maxwell is a generation older than GCN 4.0 and is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The die is larger at 148 mm², but contains fewer transistors: 1,870 million. This results in a lower transistor density of 12.6 million per mm². Maxwell supports DirectX 12 (11_0) rather than 12_0, meaning it lacks some feature level 12_0 capabilities. It does support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, which is actually a newer Vulkan version than the Radeon 540’s 1.3. The Quadro’s generation is listed as Quadro Kepler (Kx200), which is a naming anomaly since the architecture is Maxwell, but the database records it as such.

The process node difference is significant. The 14 nm process gives the Radeon 540 a smaller die and higher transistor density, which typically translates to better power efficiency. The Quadro K620’s 28 nm process is older and less dense, but the card compensates with a larger die that allows for more memory bus width and a higher clock speed. The Radeon 540 has no listed base or boost clocks, so the database cannot directly compare clock-for-clock. The Quadro K620’s memory runs at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), while the Radeon 540’s memory runs at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective). However, the Radeon’s memory is GDDR5 on a 32-bit bus, which is unusual and limits bandwidth to 24.00 GB/s, whereas the Quadro’s DDR3 on a 128-bit bus achieves 28.80 GB/s.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge in several key specifications. Memory size differs: the Radeon 540 has 1024 MB (1 GB) of GDDR5, while the Quadro K620 has 2 GB of DDR3. The memory type also differs, with GDDR5 being faster per pin but the Quadro’s wider 128-bit bus providing more total bandwidth. The Radeon’s 32-bit bus is a major limitation, capping bandwidth at 24.00 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s for the Quadro.

The process nodes differ: 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) for AMD versus 28 nm (TSMC) for NVIDIA. The Radeon 540 has 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, while the Quadro K620 has 1,870 million on a 148 mm² die. The Radeon’s transistor density is 21.4 million per mm², nearly double the Quadro’s 12.6 million per mm². The TDPs are close: 50 W for the Radeon 540 and 45 W for the Quadro K620. The suggested PSU is 250 W for AMD and 200 W for NVIDIA.

The bus interfaces differ: the Radeon 540 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the Quadro K620 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The PCIe 3.0 x8 interface offers similar bandwidth to PCIe 2.0 x16, so this is not a major differentiator, but the newer standard is generally preferable. Display outputs also differ: the Radeon 540 has 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Quadro K620 has 1x DVI and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The Quadro K620 is physically smaller, with a length of 160 mm (6.3 inches) and height of 69 mm (2.7 inches), while the Radeon 540’s dimensions are not recorded.

The FP32 compute differs slightly: the Radeon 540 delivers 908.5 GFLOPS, while the Quadro K620 manages 863.2 GFLOPS. The Radeon 540 also supports FP16 at 908.5 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the Quadro K620 has no listed FP16 capability. The DirectX support differs: the Radeon 540 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), but the Quadro K620 only supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The Vulkan versions differ: the Radeon 540 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the Quadro K620 supports Vulkan 1.4.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded benchmarks show opposite winners. In geekbench_opencl, the NVIDIA Quadro K620 scores 6693, which is 7.6% higher than the AMD Radeon 540’s 6184. This is a moderate but clear victory for NVIDIA. The Quadro’s higher memory bandwidth (28.80 GB/s) and higher boost clock (1124 MHz) likely contribute to this result. OpenCL workloads often rely on memory throughput and sustained clock speeds, both of which favor the Quadro K620.

In geekbench_vulkan, the AMD Radeon 540 wins decisively. It scores 9162 against the Quadro K620’s 5870, a delta of 56.1%. This is an enormous gap, far exceeding the OpenCL margin. The Radeon 540’s GCN 4.0 architecture is known for strong Vulkan performance, and its GDDR5 memory, while narrow, runs at a higher effective speed (6 Gbps versus 1800 Mbps). The Vulkan benchmark may also be more sensitive to the newer process node and transistor density of the Radeon 540.

The average benchmark score reflects this split. The Radeon 540’s average is 7673, driven by its Vulkan score. The Quadro K620’s average is 6282, pulled down by its weak Vulkan result. When compared to nearest rivals, the Radeon 540 is 0.6% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (7723), 1.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580), and 1.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7557). The Quadro K620 is 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER (6270) and 0.2% ahead of the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 (6270), but 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon R7 M350 (6327) and 0.8% behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 (6330). These rival comparisons indicate that both cards sit in a narrow performance band among older and lower-end GPUs, but the Radeon 540’s Vulkan advantage gives it a higher average score overall.

The pixel and texture rates also favor the Radeon 540, but only slightly. The Radeon 540’s pixel rate is 18.93 GPixel/s versus 17.98 GPixel/s for the Quadro K620, a 5.3% difference. The texture rate is 28.39 GTexel/s versus 26.98 GTexel/s, a 5.2% difference. These metrics align with the FP32 compute lead (908.5 vs 863.2 GFLOPS, a 5.3% advantage for AMD). Thus, in raw compute throughput, the Radeon 540 is consistently ahead by about 5%, but the Quadro K620’s OpenCL win shows that memory bandwidth can offset that lead in specific APIs.

In summary, the AMD Radeon 540 is the better choice for Vulkan-centric applications, offering a 56.1% performance margin that is hard to ignore. The NVIDIA Quadro K620 remains competitive in OpenCL, with a 7.6% lead, and offers twice the memory capacity (2 GB versus 1 GB) plus a wider memory bus. For users who rely on legacy OpenCL tools, the Quadro K620 is the safer option. For modern Vulkan workloads, the Radeon 540 is significantly faster. Both cards are end-of-life, and the database shows no clear overall winner; the verdict depends entirely on the target API and workload.