GPU Comparison

AMD Radeon 740M and NVIDIA Quadro K4200 occupy opposite ends of the GPU timeline, yet their benchmark averages land within striking distance. The Radeon 740M, a modern integrated part on TSMC’s 4 nm node, posts an average benchmark score of 12870, while the Quadro K4200, a discrete workstation card from 2014 built on 28 nm, scores 12398. That 3.7% gap in average score is small, but the two parts win in completely different workloads. The data shows a clear split: the AMD part dominates modern API performance, while the NVIDIA card holds a lead in legacy OpenCL compute. Neither is a universal winner, and the choice hinges on which workload matters more.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 740M takes the Vulkan benchmark decisively. It scores 15568 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 24.7% ahead of the Quadro K4200’s 12482. That is a massive margin for an integrated GPU, and it reflects the architectural gulf between the two. Vulkan is a low-overhead, modern API, and the Radeon 740M’s RDNA 3.0 design with 4 dedicated ray tracing cores is built for it. Any workload that leverages Vulkan, modern games, compute shaders, or CAD visualization with Vulkan-backed renderers, will favor the AMD part.

The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 wins the OpenCL benchmark. It scores 12313 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 17.4% ahead of the Radeon 740M’s 10172. OpenCL is an older, more established compute API, and the Quadro’s Kepler architecture with 1344 shading units and 112 TMUs is heavily optimized for it. For legacy compute tasks, video encoding offloads, or older professional applications that rely on OpenCL, the Quadro K4200 is the stronger performer.

The win count is split at 1-1 across the two head-to-head benchmarks. That means neither card is categorically faster, it is entirely workload-dependent. The Radeon 740M is the pick for anything using Vulkan, while the Quadro K4200 is the pick for OpenCL-heavy tasks.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is stark. The Radeon 740M uses the Phoenix2 chip on RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on TSMC’s 4 nm process. It packs 20,900 million transistors into a 137 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 152.6 million per square millimeter. The Quadro K4200 uses the GK104 chip on Kepler architecture, built on TSMC’s 28 nm process. It has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, for a density of just 12.0 million per square millimeter. The Radeon 740M is not just newer, it is nearly 13 times denser in transistor packing, which explains how it can deliver competitive performance with far fewer raw compute units.

The Radeon 740M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, plus 4 ray tracing cores. The Quadro K4200 has 1344 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no ray tracing support. The NVIDIA card has over 5 times the shading units and 7 times the TMUs, but the AMD card’s modern architecture makes those numbers less important. The Radeon 740M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro K4200 only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. That API gap is why the Vulkan benchmark skews so heavily toward AMD.

Memory is another fundamental difference. The Radeon 740M uses system-shared memory, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent", meaning it relies on the host system’s RAM. The Quadro K4200 has dedicated 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, with 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card’s dedicated memory is a major advantage in bandwidth-sensitive tasks, though the AMD part’s access to system memory can scale with faster RAM.

The Radeon 740M has a 45 W TDP and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor), meaning it requires no power connectors and fits no expansion slot. The Quadro K4200 is a single-slot card with a 108 W TDP, requiring a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU. The AMD part is far more power-efficient, but the NVIDIA card is a standalone product.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two benchmarks tell a simple story. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro K4200 wins with 12313 against the Radeon 740M’s 10172, a delta of -17.4% for the AMD part. That is a large loss, and it highlights the Radeon 740M’s weakness in older compute APIs. The Quadro’s 1344 shading units and 112 TMUs are clearly better suited to OpenCL’s parallel workload pattern.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the Radeon 740M wins with 15568 against the Quadro K4200’s 12482, a delta of 24.7% in AMD’s favor. That is an even larger win than the Quadro’s OpenCL margin. The Radeon 740M’s RDNA 3.0 architecture, with its 4 ray tracing cores and modern API support, is simply more efficient at Vulkan. The 24.7% lead is the single biggest performance gap in this comparison.

The average benchmark scores reflect this split. The Radeon 740M’s average of 12870 is 0.2% above the AMD FirePro W5100 (12847) and 0.3% above the AMD Radeon Pro 455 (12831) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12830). It is 0.4% below the AMD Radeon RX 580 (12928). The Quadro K4200’s average of 12398 is 1.8% below the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm (12625), 2.5% below the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT (12710), and 2.9% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (12773), but 3.3% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A (11998). Both cards sit in the same performance tier, but the Radeon 740M edges ahead on average.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster overall?

A: The AMD Radeon 740M has a higher average benchmark score of 12870, compared to the NVIDIA Quadro K4200’s 12398. That is roughly a 3.7% advantage in favor of the AMD part, but the head-to-head results are split 1-1.

Q: Why does the Quadro K4200 win OpenCL despite being older?

A: The Quadro K4200 has 1344 shading units and 112 TMUs, which are far more numerous than the Radeon 740M’s 256 shading units and 16 TMUs. OpenCL workloads scale well with raw compute unit count, so the Quadro’s larger array wins despite its older Kepler architecture.

Q: What makes the Radeon 740M so much better in Vulkan?

A: The Radeon 740M supports Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Quadro K4200 only supports Vulkan 1.2.175 and DirectX 12 (11_0). The RDNA 3.0 architecture also includes 4 ray tracing cores, which the Quadro lacks entirely.

Q: Does the Quadro K4200 have dedicated memory?

A: Yes, the Quadro K4200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 740M uses system-shared memory, with bandwidth that depends on the host system’s RAM.

Q: Is the Radeon 740M more power-efficient?

A: Yes, the Radeon 740M has a 45 W TDP and requires no power connectors, while the Quadro K4200 has a 108 W TDP and needs a 1x 6-pin power connector with a 300 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card is better for modern gaming?

A: The Radeon 740M, based on its 24.7% Vulkan lead. Vulkan is a common API in modern games, and the Radeon 740M’s ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support make it better suited to current titles.

Specification Differences

• Process Node: Radeon 740M on 4 nm, Quadro K4200 on 28 nm.
• Transistors: Radeon 740M has 20,900 million, Quadro K4200 has 3,540 million.
• Die Size: Radeon 740M at 137 mm², Quadro K4200 at 294 mm².
• Transistor Density: Radeon 740M at 152.6M / mm², Quadro K4200 at 12.0M / mm².
• Base Clock: Radeon 740M at 800 MHz, Quadro K4200 at 771 MHz.
• Boost Clock: Radeon 740M at 2800 MHz, Quadro K4200 at 784 MHz.
• Memory: Radeon 740M uses System Shared, Quadro K4200 has 4 GB GDDR5.
• Memory Bus: Radeon 740M is System Shared, Quadro K4200 is 256 bit.
• Memory Bandwidth: Radeon 740M is System Dependent, Quadro K4200 is 172.8 GB/s.
• Shading Units: Radeon 740M has 256, Quadro K4200 has 1344.
• TMUs: Radeon 740M has 16, Quadro K4200 has 112.
• ROPs: Radeon 740M has 8, Quadro K4200 has 32.
• Ray Tracing Cores: Radeon 740M has 4, Quadro K4200 has none.
• Pixel Rate: Radeon 740M at 22.40 GPixel/s, Quadro K4200 at 21.95 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: Radeon 740M at 44.80 GTexel/s, Quadro K4200 at 87.81 GTexel/s.
• FP32: Radeon 740M at 2.867 TFLOPS, Quadro K4200 at 2.107 TFLOPS.
• FP16: Radeon 740M at 2.867 TFLOPS (1:1), Quadro K4200 has none.
• TDP: Radeon 740M at 45 W, Quadro K4200 at 108 W.
• Slot Width: Radeon 740M is IGP, Quadro K4200 is Single-slot.
• Power Connectors: Radeon 740M has none, Quadro K4200 has 1x 6-pin.
• Suggested PSU: Radeon 740M has none listed, Quadro K4200 is 300 W.
• Bus Interface: Radeon 740M is PCIe 4.0 x8, Quadro K4200 is PCIe 2.0 x16.
• Display Outputs: Radeon 740M is Motherboard Dependent, Quadro K4200 has 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2.
• DirectX Support: Radeon 740M at 12 Ultimate (12_2), Quadro K4200 at 12 (11_0).
• Vulkan Support: Radeon 740M at 1.4, Quadro K4200 at 1.2.175.
• Production Status: Radeon 740M is Active, Quadro K4200 is End-of-life.
• Release Date: Radeon 740M on 2024-01-30, Quadro K4200 on 2014-07-21.

The Verdict

Pick the AMD Radeon 740M if your workload is modern and API-sensitive. It wins Vulkan by 24.7%, supports ray tracing, and has a 45 W TDP that makes it ideal for compact, power-constrained systems. The data shows it is also slightly ahead on average benchmark score (12870 vs 12398), placing it in the same tier as the AMD Radeon RX 580. It is the better choice for Vulkan-based games, modern compute, and any system where you want integrated graphics without a discrete card.

Pick the NVIDIA Quadro K4200 if you need OpenCL performance or dedicated memory. It wins OpenCL by 17.4%, has 4 GB of GDDR5 with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth, and offers significantly more shading units (1344 vs 256) and TMUs (112 vs 16). Its 108 W TDP is higher, but it is a single-slot card with a 300 W suggested PSU. For legacy OpenCL compute tasks, older professional applications, or workloads that benefit from dedicated VRAM, the Quadro K4200 is the stronger option.

The verdict is not about which is "better", it is about which matches the software you run. Modern Vulkan workloads favor the Radeon 740M. Legacy OpenCL and bandwidth-sensitive tasks favor the Quadro K4200. The Radeon 740M is the forward-looking choice with active production status, while the Quadro K4200 is end-of-life. If you are building a new system, the Radeon 740M’s 4 nm process and modern API support make it the safer bet. If you are maintaining an older workstation with OpenCL dependencies, the Quadro K4200 still holds its ground.