AMD Radeon 760M vs NVIDIA Quadro K620M Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 760M compare to the NVIDIA Quadro K620M in overall average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M has an average benchmark score of 6019, while the NVIDIA Quadro K620M scores 5957. This places the Radeon 760M 1.0% ahead in aggregate performance, a modest but consistent margin.

Q: Which GPU has the higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M sits at the 35th percentile, while the NVIDIA Quadro K620M is at the 34th percentile. The one-percentile gap reflects the narrow average score difference between the two parts.

Q: What is the biggest single-benchmark advantage in the head-to-head comparison?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon 760M scores 20255 versus 5957 for the NVIDIA Quadro K620M. That is a 240% advantage for the Radeon 760M, the only shared benchmark in the dataset.

Q: How does the Radeon 760M's nearest rival compare in average score?

A: The closest rival to the Radeon 760M is the AMD Radeon RX 6400 with an average score of 6001, a 0.3% delta. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M also sits at 6000, similarly 0.3% behind.

Q: What is the Quadro K620M's closest competitor in the benchmark database?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8730M matches the Quadro K620M at 5955, a 0% delta. The Intel UHD Graphics 730 trails at 5929, which is 0.5% behind the K620M.

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M boosts to 2599 MHz, while the NVIDIA Quadro K620M boosts to 1124 MHz. The Radeon 760M's boost clock is more than double that of the K620M.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 760M is built on the Phoenix chip using RDNA 3.0 architecture, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA Quadro K620M uses the GM108S chip with Maxwell architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node gap is substantial: 4 nm versus 28 nm, which explains the dramatic differences in transistor density and power efficiency.

The Radeon 760M packs 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 142.6 million per square millimeter. The Quadro K620M has 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, with a density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The Radeon 760M achieves over ten times the transistor density of the K620M.

The Radeon 760M features 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. It also includes 8 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Quadro K620M. The K620M has 384 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with no ray tracing support. The Radeon 760M's pixel rate is 41.58 GPixel/s versus 8.992 GPixel/s for the K620M, and its texture rate is 83.17 GTexel/s versus 17.98 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The Radeon 760M uses system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. The Quadro K620M has dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 16.02 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon 760M's memory clock is listed as system shared, while the K620M runs at 1001 MHz with 2 Gbps effective speed.

API support shows another generational gap. The Radeon 760M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the K620M only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon 760M's RDNA 3.0 architecture brings hardware ray tracing and the 12_2 feature set, whereas Maxwell-era silicon predates those capabilities.

The Radeon 760M has a TDP of 15 W and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The Quadro K620M is a 30 W MXM module with an MXM-A (3.0) bus interface. The Radeon 760M is an active production part released on 2024-01-30, while the K620M is end-of-life, released on 2015-02-28. The Radeon 760M's predecessor is Navi II IGP, and the K620M's predecessor is Quadro Fermi-M with a successor of Quadro Maxwell-M.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear generational winner: the AMD Radeon 760M outperforms the NVIDIA Quadro K620M in every measurable dimension. The average benchmark score of 6019 versus 5957 gives the Radeon a 1.0% edge in aggregate, but the Geekbench OpenCL result shows a 240% advantage—the Radeon 760M is in a different performance class entirely for compute workloads.

The Radeon 760M should be the choice for anyone needing modern API support, hardware ray tracing, and substantially higher raw compute throughput. Its 5.323 TFLOPS FP32 performance dwarfs the K620M's 863.2 GFLOPS. The Radeon 760M also offers superior pixel and texture rates, with 41.58 GPixel/s and 83.17 GTexel/s versus 8.992 GPixel/s and 17.98 GTexel/s respectively.

The Quadro K620M retains one practical advantage: dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 memory with 16.02 GB/s bandwidth. For systems where shared memory is undesirable or unavailable, the K620M's dedicated frame buffer could be relevant. However, the K620M is end-of-life, uses a 28 nm process, and lacks ray tracing support.

Buyers prioritizing longevity, performance, and modern features should select the AMD Radeon 760M. The Quadro K620M only makes sense for legacy systems requiring an MXM module with dedicated memory, where the Radeon 760M's IGP form factor cannot fit.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 760M | NVIDIA Quadro K620M |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Maxwell |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 25,390 million | 1,020 million |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 142.6M / mm² | 13.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | 1029 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2599 MHz | 1124 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 16.02 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 384 |

| TMUs | 32 | 16 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 8 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 41.58 GPixel/s | 8.992 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 83.17 GTexel/s | 17.98 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 5.323 TFLOPS | 863.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 5.323 TFLOPS (1:1) | None |

| TDP | 15 W | 30 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | MXM Module |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | MXM-A (3.0) |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_0) |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2024-01-30 | 2015-02-28 |

| Predecessor | Navi II IGP | Quadro Fermi-M |

| Successor | None | Quadro Maxwell-M |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark between the two GPUs is Geekbench OpenCL, where the AMD Radeon 760M scores 20255 against the NVIDIA Quadro K620M's 5957. This represents a 240% advantage for the Radeon 760M, which is the single largest performance gap in the entire comparison.

This OpenCL result is consistent with the raw computational specifications. The Radeon 760M delivers 5.323 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the K620M produces 863.2 GFLOPS—a ratio of roughly 6.2 to 1 in favor of the Radeon. The benchmark delta of 240% (a 3.4 to 1 ratio) is actually smaller than the theoretical FP32 gap, suggesting the K620M's dedicated memory may help it in certain OpenCL workloads.

The Radeon 760M also holds advantages in rasterization throughput. Its pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s is over 4.6 times the K620M's 8.992 GPixel/s. The texture rate of 83.17 GTexel/s versus 17.98 GTexel/s gives the Radeon a 4.6 to 1 edge as well. These ratios align closely with the shading unit and TMU counts: the Radeon has 512 versus 384 shading units (1.33 to 1) but 32 versus 16 TMUs (2 to 1), with the clock speed difference amplifying the final throughput numbers.

The Radeon 760M's boost clock of 2599 MHz versus 1124 MHz for the K620M contributes significantly to its performance lead. Even though the K620M has a higher base clock (1029 MHz versus 800 MHz), the Radeon's boost clock is more than double, and its FP32 per-clock efficiency benefits from the newer RDNA 3.0 architecture.

In average benchmark score terms, the Radeon 760M's 6019 edges out the K620M's 5957 by 1.0%. This smaller aggregate gap compared to the OpenCL result suggests that the K620M may perform relatively better in other benchmark categories, though no additional shared tests are available in the dataset.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 760M wins decisively in compute-heavy workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 20255 demonstrates a 240% advantage over the Quadro K620M, making it the clear choice for general-purpose GPU computing, OpenCL applications, and any workload that leverages FP32 throughput. The 5.323 TFLOPS FP32 rating supports this, offering over six times the compute of the K620M's 863.2 GFLOPS.

The Radeon 760M also wins in modern graphics features. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support and 8 ray tracing cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a capability the Maxwell-based K620M simply cannot offer. For any gaming or rendering workload that uses DirectX 12 Ultimate features, the Radeon 760M is the only viable option between the two.

Rasterization throughput favors the Radeon 760M as well. With 41.58 GPixel/s pixel rate and 83.17 GTexel/s texture rate, it outperforms the K620M's 8.992 GPixel/s and 17.98 GTexel/s by roughly 4.6 times in both metrics. This translates to higher fill rates in traditional 3D rendering.

The NVIDIA Quadro K620M wins in one specific scenario: systems requiring dedicated memory. The K620M's 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus provides 16.02 GB/s of bandwidth, independent of system RAM. The Radeon 760M relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent, which can be a disadvantage in configurations with slow or insufficient system memory.

The K620M also wins on form factor compatibility for legacy systems. As an MXM module, it fits in notebooks designed for that interface, whereas the Radeon 760M is an IGP that must be integrated into the motherboard. For upgrading an existing MXM-based laptop, the K620M is the only one of the two that physically fits.

Power consumption slightly favors the Radeon 760M at 15 W versus 30 W for the K620M, though this is offset by the K620M's dedicated memory not taxing the main memory subsystem. The Radeon 760M's lower TDP and active production status make it the better choice for new designs, while the end-of-life K620M suits only maintenance of existing systems.