AMD Radeon 660M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent victory for the AMD Radeon 660M across both benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon 660M scores 12,876 against the NVIDIA Quadro K4200's 12,313, a 4.6% advantage. The margin widens considerably in Geekbench Vulkan, where the AMD part reaches 14,748 while the Quadro manages 12,482, an 18.2% lead. The database records two wins for the AMD Radeon 660M and zero for the NVIDIA Quadro K4200 in direct comparison.

The Vulkan result is particularly telling. An 18.2% delta in a modern graphics API reflects not just raw compute but also the efficiency of the underlying architecture in handling contemporary workloads. The OpenCL gap, while smaller at 4.6%, still favors the integrated Radeon part over the dedicated Quadro card. This outcome is notable given the Quadro's status as a discrete workstation GPU with its own dedicated memory and higher power envelope.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the AMD Radeon 660M sits at 13,812, which places it in the 55th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 averages 12,398, landing in the 52nd percentile. The 1,414-point gap in average scores corresponds to the consistent lead seen in individual tests.

The nearest rivals for the AMD Radeon 660M underscore its positioning. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile averages 13,821, a mere 0.1% ahead. The AMD Radeon RX 570X scores 13,871, 0.4% above, while the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT, a far more expensive part, actually scores slightly lower at 13,745, 0.5% behind. The NVIDIA Tesla K10 trails by 1.5% at 14,029. This clustering suggests the Radeon 660M punches well above its integrated status, matching dedicated parts from several generations.

For the NVIDIA Quadro K4200, the nearest rivals show a different story. The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm averages 12,625, 1.8% higher. The AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT scores 12,710, 2.5% ahead, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 reaches 12,773, 2.9% better. Only the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A falls behind at 11,998, a 3.3% deficit for the Quadro. This places the K4200 at the lower end of its performance neighborhood, though not dramatically so.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is substantial. The AMD Radeon 660M uses the Rembrandt chip built on RDNA 2.0, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 relies on the GK104 chip with Kepler architecture, using a 28 nm process also at TSMC. The process node difference alone, 6 nm versus 28 nm, explains much of the efficiency gap.

Transistor counts tell a fascinating story. The AMD part packs 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, yielding a density of 63.0 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip contains 3,540 million transistors across a larger 294 mm² die, resulting in just 12.0 million per square millimeter. The Radeon 660M achieves over five times the transistor density, a direct consequence of the more advanced manufacturing process.

Clock speeds favor the integrated AMD solution. The Radeon 660M runs at a base of 1500 MHz with a boost of 1900 MHz. The Quadro K4200 operates at 771 MHz base and 784 MHz boost, less than half the AMD part's boost frequency. This clock disparity compounds the architectural differences.

Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The AMD Radeon 660M uses system shared memory, with the bus width and bandwidth described as system dependent. The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The K4200's memory runs at 1350 MHz, or 5.4 Gbps effective. While the Quadro has dedicated VRAM, the Radeon's shared memory approach benefits from modern system memory speeds, though the database lists its bandwidth as system dependent rather than a fixed figure.

Compute resources show a clear division of labor. The AMD Radeon 660M has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. It also includes 6 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Kepler-based Quadro. The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 counters with 1,344 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the Radeon 660M's higher clocks and newer architecture produce competitive results.

Pixel and texture rates illustrate the trade-offs. The AMD part achieves 30.40 GPixel/s pixel rate and 45.60 GTexel/s texture rate. The NVIDIA GPU delivers 21.95 GPixel/s and 87.81 GTexel/s. The Quadro's texture throughput is nearly double, thanks to its 112 TMUs, but its pixel rate is lower. Floating point performance favors the Quadro in raw terms: 2.107 TFLOPS FP32 versus 1,459.2 GFLOPS for the Radeon. However, the AMD part supports FP16 at 2.918 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, a capability the Kepler architecture lacks entirely.

Power consumption diverges sharply. The AMD Radeon 660M draws just 40 W as an integrated graphics processor. The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 consumes 108 W and requires a single 6-pin power connector, with a suggested power supply of 300 W. The Radeon 660M needs no power connectors and operates within the mobile platform's thermal envelope.

API support favors the newer AMD architecture. The Radeon 660M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro K4200 manages DirectX 12 with feature level 11_0, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The ray tracing cores on the Radeon enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature completely absent from the Kepler design.

The bus interfaces differ as well. The AMD part uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the NVIDIA card uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The Quadro's physical dimensions are recorded at 241 mm length and 111 mm height, occupying a single slot. The Radeon 660M is an IGP with no slot width, portable device dependent display outputs, and no separate dimensions.

Release timelines show nearly eight years between these products. The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 launched in July 2014, succeeding Quadro Fermi and preceding Quadro Maxwell. The AMD Radeon 660M arrived in January 2022, following Vega II IGP and leading to Navi III IGP. Both are now end-of-life in the database.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the AMD Radeon 660M in both recorded tests. The 18.2% Vulkan advantage and 4.6% OpenCL edge are consistent across workloads. The Radeon's modern RDNA 2.0 architecture, 6 nm process, and ray tracing support provide features the Kepler-based Quadro cannot match.

The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 offers dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 memory and higher raw FP32 throughput at 2.107 TFLOPS, which may benefit specific legacy professional applications. Its 112 TMUs deliver 87.81 GTexel/s texture rate, nearly double the AMD part. However, these advantages do not translate into benchmark wins in the recorded data.

For users prioritizing modern API support, ray tracing capabilities, and raw benchmark performance, the AMD Radeon 660M is the clear choice. The Quadro K4200 retains relevance only for scenarios where dedicated memory and Kepler-era compatibility are essential, though the data shows it trails in both OpenCL and Vulkan.

The percentile rankings reinforce this conclusion. The Radeon 660M sits at the 55th percentile of all GPUs, three points above the Quadro's 52nd percentile. The average score gap of 1,414 points represents a meaningful performance tier difference.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher benchmark scores in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon 660M wins both recorded tests. It scores 12,876 versus 12,313 in Geekbench OpenCL (4.6% ahead) and 14,748 versus 12,482 in Geekbench Vulkan (18.2% ahead).

Q: What are the transistor counts for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 660M has 13,100 million transistors, while the NVIDIA Quadro K4200 has 3,540 million. The AMD part also achieves a much higher transistor density at 63.0 million per square millimeter versus 12.0 million.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Quadro K4200 support ray tracing?

A: No, the Quadro K4200 has no ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon 660M includes 6 ray tracing cores, a feature enabled by its RDNA 2.0 architecture.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon 660M is rated at 40 W TDP, while the NVIDIA Quadro K4200 is rated at 108 W. The Quadro also requires a 6-pin power connector and suggests a 300 W power supply.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 660M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The database shows it trails the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile by 0.1% and the AMD Radeon RX 570X by 0.4%, while leading the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT by 0.5% and the NVIDIA Tesla K10 by 1.5% in average score.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs use?

A: The AMD Radeon 660M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 660M wins in Geekbench OpenCL with a 4.6% margin and in Geekbench Vulkan with an 18.2% margin. It also wins on process efficiency, transistor density, clock speed, power consumption, and API feature support. The 6 nm process, 1900 MHz boost clock, and 40 W TDP make it suitable for modern mobile platforms where power efficiency matters. Its ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support position it for contemporary games and applications.

The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 wins in specific raw compute areas. Its 2.107 TFLOPS FP32 performance exceeds the AMD part's 1,459.2 GFLOPS. Its 87.81 GTexel/s texture rate nearly doubles the Radeon's 45.60 GTexel/s. The 4 GB dedicated GDDR5 memory with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth provides guaranteed memory bandwidth independent of system configuration, which can be an advantage in professional workflows where consistent memory performance is required. The 1344 shading units and 112 TMUs give it a wider execution width for certain workloads.

For texture-heavy operations that scale with TMU count, the Quadro K4200 may still hold an edge, despite its lower pixel rate of 21.95 GPixel/s compared to the Radeon's 30.40 GPixel/s. The Quadro's PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, while older, offers full x16 bandwidth rather than the Radeon's x8 link.

The data suggests a clear generational split. The AMD Radeon 660M represents a modern integrated solution that outperforms an older dedicated workstation card in actual benchmarks. The Quadro K4200 retains relevance only for legacy applications requiring Kepler-era driver support or specific professional software certifications. For any modern workload that leverages Vulkan or DirectX 12 Ultimate features, the Radeon 660M is the superior choice based on recorded performance.