AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two benchmark results that appear in the database are both compute-oriented workloads, and the margin between these two products is not subtle. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 scores 118202 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M scores 19989 points. That translates to a 491.3% advantage for the AMD part. In raw compute throughput, the R9700 is in a completely different league. The recorded data shows that the R9700 delivers roughly five times the OpenCL performance of the M4000M, which is the kind of gap that makes the older NVIDIA card unsuitable for any modern compute task.

The second recorded test, Geekbench Vulkan, shows a similar story but with a slightly smaller gap. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 scores 63550 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M scores 20971 points. The delta here is 203%, meaning the AMD card is three times faster in Vulkan. This is a substantial win for AMD, though the smaller percentage compared to OpenCL suggests the M4000M is relatively less weak when the workload uses Vulkan's lower-level hardware abstraction.

It is importantly the two cards share no other common benchmark entries in the database. The R9700 has a much broader set of recorded results, including Passmark tests for DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, plus G2D and G3D scores. The M4000M only has the two Geekbench entries. The database shows the R9700's Passmark G3D score at 26979, which sits at the 69th percentile of all GPUs. The M4000M's average benchmark score is 20480, which places it at the 65th percentile. Despite that percentile being closer than the head-to-head deltas suggest, the actual recorded scores in the shared tests tell a clear story: AMD wins both, and wins by enormous margins.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database provides context for these scores. The R9700's average benchmark score is 23315, which is only 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 M290X and the AMD Radeon RX 6600M. It is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 and the NVIDIA P106-100. This clustering suggests the R9700's average is dragged down by its weaker DirectX and G2D results, since the compute scores are so dominant. The M4000M's average of 20480 is 0.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, 0.4% behind the Intel Arc B570, 0.5% behind the Intel Arc A750, and 0.9% behind the AMD Radeon R9 M390X. The M4000M sits in a much tighter pack relative to its peers, but those peers are all older or lower-tier parts.

The win count is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 wins 2 benchmarks, and the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M wins 0. There is no recorded test where the NVIDIA card comes out ahead. The deltas are 491.3% and 203%, so this is not a case of a narrow victory or a single outlier test. The data indicates that the R9700 is categorically faster in the workloads that were measured.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion for most buyers: the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 is the superior product in every measured benchmark. If the workload is compute-heavy, whether OpenCL or Vulkan, the R9700 delivers between two and five times the performance of the M4000M. The NVIDIA card is end-of-life, released in 2015, while the AMD card is active and released in 2025. The architecture gap is a decade old. No recorded result suggests the M4000M can keep up.

The M4000M is not without a use case, but that use case is extremely narrow. It is a 100 W MXM module, which means it is designed for portable workstations where power draw is critical. The R9700 is a 300 W dual-slot card with a 16-pin power connector and a suggested 700 W power supply. If the system is a laptop or a compact mobile workstation, the M4000M is the only one of the two that fits physically. The R9700 has a length of 267 mm, height of 111 mm, and width of 40 mm, which is not compatible with an MXM socket.

For any desktop or chassis that can physically accommodate the R9700, the choice is obvious. The R9700's 32 GB of VRAM is eight times the M4000M's 4 GB. The bandwidth is 644.6 GB/s versus 160.4 GB/s. The FP32 throughput is 47.84 TFLOPS versus 2.593 TFLOPS. The R9700 also has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, compared to 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 64 ROPs on the M4000M. Every specification that matters for raw rendering or compute favors AMD.

The only reason to choose the M4000M is the form factor and the power envelope. If the application is a legacy mobile workstation that requires an MXM module with no external power connectors, the M4000M is the only option between these two. But from a pure performance standpoint, the database shows no contest.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 wins in every measured benchmark category. In OpenCL, it is 491.3% ahead. In Vulkan, it is 203% ahead. The R9700 also has a broader benchmark footprint in the database, with recorded scores in Passmark DirectX 9 (363), 10 (155), 11 (272), and 12 (83), plus G2D (1236) and G3D (26979), and GPU Compute (15300). These are not compared directly to the M4000M, but they indicate the R9700 is a well-rounded card that handles legacy DirectX titles and compute workloads.

The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M does not win any recorded benchmark. Its only advantage is physical: it is an MXM module with no power connectors, a 100 W TDP, and no length, height, or width recorded because it is dependent on the portable device. The M4000M also uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than the R9700's GDDR6, but that does not show up as a performance win. The M4000M's bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16, while the R9700 uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The R9700 also supports newer display outputs, including 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1a, whereas the M4000M's outputs are portable device dependent.

For use cases, the R9700 is the pick for any workstation that does rendering, simulation, machine learning inference, or any GPU compute task. The 32 GB VRAM is sufficient for large models or high-resolution textures. The M4000M is the pick for a system that must run on 100 W or less and fit in an MXM slot. That is a niche for older mobile workstations, not a general recommendation.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 in OpenCL?

A: The R9700 scores 118202 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the M4000M scores 19989. The delta is 491.3% in favor of AMD.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M win any benchmark?

A: No. The database records 2 wins for the AMD card and 0 for the NVIDIA card. The M4000M loses both Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The R9700 has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 644.6 GB/s bandwidth. The M4000M has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Can the NVIDIA card be used in a desktop PCIe slot?

A: The M4000M is an MXM module, not a standard desktop card. It uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface but is physically designed for portable devices. The R9700 is a dual-slot card with a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The R9700 has a 300 W TDP and requires a 1x 16-pin power connector with a suggested 700 W power supply. The M4000M has a 100 W TDP and no power connectors.

Q: Which card has better Vulkan performance?

A: The R9700 scores 63550 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 203% higher than the M4000M's 20971.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from completely different architectural eras. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 is built on RDNA 4.0, using the Navi 48 chip, and is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM204 chip, built on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node difference is significant: 4 nm versus 28 nm. That seven-generation gap explains a large part of the performance delta.

The transistor counts tell the same story. The R9700 has 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 151.0 million per mm². The M4000M has 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, for a density of 13.1 million per mm². The R9700 packs more than ten times the transistors into a smaller die. The die size is actually larger on the M4000M, but the process node makes the R9700 far denser.

The R9700 supports hardware ray tracing with 64 RT cores. The M4000M has no RT cores listed. The R9700 also has a higher feature set in DirectX, supporting 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the M4000M only supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the underlying hardware capabilities are vastly different. The R9700's FP16 throughput is 47.84 TFLOPS (1:1), while the M4000M has no listed FP16 performance, which means it likely lacks native half-precision support.

The R9700 uses a newer memory type (GDDR6) and a newer bus interface (PCIe 5.0). The M4000M uses GDDR5 and PCIe 3.0. Display outputs also differ: the R9700 has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1a, while the M4000M's outputs are portable device dependent. The R9700 is an active production card, while the M4000M is end-of-life.

Specification Differences

The specification differences between the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 and the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M are extensive. The R9700 has a base clock of 1660 MHz and a boost clock of 2920 MHz, with a game clock of 2350 MHz. The M4000M has a base clock of 975 MHz and a boost clock of 1013 MHz, with no game clock listed. The memory clock on the R9700 is 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective), while the M4000M is 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity is 32 GB versus 4 GB. Both use a 256-bit bus, but the R9700's bandwidth is 644.6 GB/s versus 160.4 GB/s. The R9700 has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The M4000M has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The R9700 has 64 RT cores; the M4000M has none. Pixel rate is 373.8 GPixel/s versus 64.83 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 747.5 GTexel/s versus 81.04 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 47.84 TFLOPS versus 2.593 TFLOPS.

The R9700 draws 300 W and is dual-slot, measuring 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide. The M4000M is an MXM module with a 100 W TDP and no recorded dimensions. The R9700 uses a 1x 16-pin power connector and suggests a 700 W power supply; the M4000M has no power connectors and no suggested PSU. The R9700 is PCIe 5.0 x16, while the M4000M is PCIe 3.0 x16. The R9700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The M4000M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The R9700 was released on 2025-07-22 with a launch MSRP of 1,299 USD. The M4000M was released on 2015-08-17 with no launch MSRP recorded. The R9700's predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega, while the M4000M's predecessor is the Quadro Kepler-M and its successor is the Quadro Pascal-M.