AMD Radeon 880M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4100M Comparison

AMD Radeon 880M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4100M

The data positions these two mobile graphics processors at opposite ends of their respective eras. The AMD Radeon 880M, a 2024 integrated graphics processor built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, carries an average benchmark score of 8436 and sits at the 43rd percentile of all GPUs. The NVIDIA Quadro K4100M, a 2013 professional mobile workstation part based on the Kepler architecture, averages 7906 points and lands at the 41st percentile. While their overall standing is similar, the underlying specifications and the single head-to-head benchmark available reveal a decisive generational gap, with the AMD part delivering more than triple the compute performance in a fraction of the power envelope.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is lopsided. The AMD Radeon 880M scores 31285 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro K4100M manages 9149 points. That translates to a 241.9% advantage for the AMD part—meaning the Radeon 880M delivers roughly 3.4 times the raw compute throughput of the Quadro in this workload. This is not a marginal win; it is a dominant one that underscores how far integrated graphics have come since the Kepler generation.

The OpenCL result aligns with the theoretical compute figures. The Radeon 880M is rated at 4.454 TFLOPS FP32, while the Quadro K4100M is rated at 1.627 TFLOPS FP32. The AMD part's FP32 output is approximately 2.7 times higher, which is consistent with the benchmark delta after accounting for driver efficiency and memory subsystem differences. The Quadro's only other benchmark in the database is Geekbench Metal, where it scores 6662 points, but no Metal result exists for the Radeon 880M, so no direct comparison is possible there.

The average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story than the head-to-head. The Radeon 880M averages 8436 points across its suite of tests, while the Quadro K4100M averages 7906 points—a gap of about 6.7% in favor of AMD. However, the Radeon's score is buoyed by strong results in PassMark tests, including a G3D score of 7615 and a G2D score of 969, whereas the Quadro's average is based on only two OpenCL/Metal entries. The head-to-head OpenCL test is the more reliable indicator of relative compute capability, and it heavily favors the AMD part.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 880M has an average benchmark score of 8436, while the NVIDIA Quadro K4100M averages 7906 points. This places the Radeon 880M at the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, compared to the Quadro's 41st percentile.

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon 880M in OpenCL?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Radeon 880M scores 31285 versus the Quadro K4100M's 9149, giving the AMD part a 241.9% lead. This is the only head-to-head benchmark available in the data.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The Radeon 880M uses system-shared memory, with its size, type, and bus width all listed as "System Shared," and bandwidth described as "System Dependent." The Quadro K4100M has a dedicated 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has higher pixel and texture fill rates?

A: The Radeon 880M has a pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s. The Quadro K4100M is significantly lower, with 16.94 GPixel/s and 67.78 GTexel/s respectively.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 880M is listed as "Active" in production, while the NVIDIA Quadro K4100M is marked as "End-of-life." The Quadro's predecessor was the Quadro Fermi-M, and its successor is the Quadro Maxwell-M.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these two GPUs?

A: The Radeon 880M has a TDP of 15 W, while the Quadro K4100M has a TDP of 100 W. This means the Radeon delivers far higher performance per watt, despite the Quadro consuming over six times the power.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural eras. The AMD Radeon 880M is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It uses the Strix Point chip and belongs to the Navi III IGP generation. The NVIDIA Quadro K4100M is based on the Kepler architecture, built on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC, using the GK104 chip from the Quadro Kepler-M generation.

The manufacturing gap is enormous. The Radeon 880M integrates 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 145.9 million per square millimeter. The Quadro K4100M has just 3,540 million transistors on a larger 294 mm² die, with a density of only 12.0 million per square millimeter. The Radeon packs nearly ten times as many transistors into a smaller physical area, which explains its superior feature set and efficiency.

Shader and fixed-function unit counts also diverge sharply. The Radeon 880M has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. It also includes 12 ray tracing cores, a feature the Quadro lacks entirely. The Quadro, by contrast, has 1152 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs—more of each—but this does not translate into higher performance due to its much lower clock speeds and older architecture. The Radeon also has no tensor cores listed, while the Quadro has none either.

API support is another differentiator. The Radeon 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro K4100M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The Radeon's newer DirectX feature level and higher Vulkan version reflect its modern design, while the Quadro's older feature set limits its compatibility with newer titles and workloads.

Specification Differences

The specification table shows several fields where the two GPUs differ. The most obvious is the process node: the Radeon 880M uses a 4 nm process, while the Quadro K4100M uses 28 nm. Clock speeds also differ, with the Radeon boosting to 2900 MHz from a 400 MHz base, while the Quadro runs at a flat 706 MHz base and boost. The Radeon's memory clock is listed as "System Shared," while the Quadro operates its GDDR5 at 800 MHz with 3.2 Gbps effective.

Memory capacity and bandwidth are not comparable. The Radeon 880M relies on system-shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, while the Quadro offers 4 GB of GDDR5 with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon's bandwidth is described as "System Dependent," meaning it varies with the host system's memory configuration, whereas the Quadro's is fixed.

Compute rates are starkly different. The Radeon 880M delivers 4.454 TFLOPS FP32 and 4.454 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1), while the Quadro provides 1.627 TFLOPS FP32 and has no FP16 figure listed. The Radeon also has a higher pixel rate (46.40 GPixel/s vs 16.94 GPixel/s) and texture rate (139.2 GTexel/s vs 67.78 GTexel/s).

Power and form factor differ as well. The Radeon 880M has a TDP of 15 W and an IGP slot width, while the Quadro has a TDP of 100 W and an MXM Module form factor. The Radeon uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Quadro uses MXM-B (3.0). The Radeon is listed as Active with a release date of July 2024, while the Quadro is End-of-life with a July 2013 release date. The Quadro has a launch MSRP of 1,499 USD. Neither GPU has power connectors listed.

The Verdict

The data makes a clear case for the AMD Radeon 880M as the superior performer in almost every measurable way. Its 241.9% lead in OpenCL is decisive, and its higher fill rates, compute throughput, and newer architecture leave the Quadro K4100M in an untenable position. The Quadro's only advantages are its dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 memory with fixed 102.4 GB/s bandwidth and its higher raw counts of shading units, TMUs, and ROPs. But those advantages do not overcome the Radeon's massive clock speed advantage (2900 MHz vs 706 MHz) and architectural efficiency.

For anyone choosing between these two today, the Radeon 880M is the logical pick. It offers more than double the average benchmark score, a 43rd percentile standing versus the Quadro's 41st, and it does so at 15 W compared to 100 W. The Quadro's end-of-life status and 2013 release date mean it lacks modern features like ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support. The Radeon is Active and supports the latest APIs.

The Quadro K4100M might still serve a niche role in legacy professional applications where certified drivers and dedicated memory are valued, but the data shows no performance scenario where it outpaces the Radeon 880M. The single head-to-head benchmark is a rout, and the overall averages reinforce the same conclusion. The AMD part wins on compute, efficiency, and future-proofing.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 880M wins in every direct performance comparison available in the data. It is vastly ahead in OpenCL compute, and its higher pixel and texture rates suggest it would also excel in graphics-heavy workloads such as modern gaming and 3D rendering. Its 12 ray tracing cores provide hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature the Quadro cannot offer. Its 15 W TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops, while the Quadro's 100 W TDP requires a bulkier chassis with more robust cooling.

The NVIDIA Quadro K4100M has no benchmark wins in the head-to-head data, but it does have specific attributes that could matter in certain contexts. Its dedicated 4 GB of GDDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth is a fixed resource, which can be more predictable than system-shared memory that is dependent on the host system. Its higher shading unit count (1152 vs 768) and TMU count (96 vs 48) are theoretical advantages, though they do not translate to performance gains in the available benchmarks.

In practical terms, the Radeon 880M is the clear choice for modern workloads, including DirectX 12 Ultimate titles and Vulkan applications. The Quadro K4100M, with its legacy Kepler architecture and end-of-life status, is only relevant for older professional software that may rely on its specific driver certification. The data does not support any scenario where the Quadro outperforms the Radeon, making the AMD part the superior option across the board.