AMD Radeon HD 7730M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains a single direct comparison between these two GPUs, and it is a close contest. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon HD 7730M scores 6,581 while the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 reaches 6,816. The margin is a slim 3.4% in favor of the Quadro K4000, a gap that suggests these two parts operate in a similar performance tier despite their very different design goals.

Looking at the broader database context, the Quadro K4000's OpenCL result of 6,816 places it slightly above the Radeon HD 7730M, but the story becomes more nuanced when examining average scores. The Radeon HD 7730M posts an average benchmark score of 6,581, which is actually higher than the Quadro K4000's average of 5,982. This discrepancy exists because the Quadro K4000 also has recorded results in Metal and Vulkan tests, scoring 4,166 and 6,964 respectively, and these additional data points pull its average downward. The OpenCL head-to-head is the only directly comparable test, and there the NVIDIA part wins, but the average scores tell a different tale about consistency across different API workloads.

The percentile rankings reinforce this mixed picture. The Radeon HD 7730M sits at the 38th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Quadro K4000 ranks at the 34th percentile. This means the AMD part outperforms a larger share of the overall GPU population, even though it loses the specific OpenCL comparison. The data implies that the Radeon's single strong result in OpenCL carries it further in the overall distribution, whereas the Quadro's additional test results, particularly the lower Metal score, drag its standing down.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a 3.4% advantage. This is a meaningful but not overwhelming lead. The Quadro K4000 also demonstrates broader API support in its recorded benchmarks, with scores across Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, suggesting it can handle a wider variety of compute workloads. Its Vulkan score of 6,964 is particularly strong, and its OpenCL result of 6,816 is its second-best showing.

The AMD Radeon HD 7730M, by contrast, has only one recorded benchmark result, the OpenCL score of 6,581. It cannot claim a direct win in any comparison, but its average benchmark score of 6,581 exceeds the Quadro K4000's average of 5,982 by roughly 10%. This means that if the metric is overall average performance across all recorded tests, the Radeon comes out ahead, even though it loses the specific OpenCL matchup.

The use-case split becomes clearer when considering the hardware profiles. The Quadro K4000 is a desktop workstation card with a single-slot design, a 6-pin power connector, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. It is built for sustained professional workloads, with 3 GB of GDDR5 memory and a 192-bit bus. The Radeon HD 7730M is a mobile part with a 25 W TDP, 2 GB of DDR3 memory, and a 128-bit bus, clearly aimed at laptops where power efficiency matters more than raw throughput. The data suggests the Quadro K4000 wins on peak compute in OpenCL and offers more memory bandwidth, while the Radeon HD 7730M wins on efficiency and average score consistency.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families. The AMD Radeon HD 7730M uses the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Chelsea chip, while the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 is built on the Kepler architecture with the GK106 chip. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the transistor counts diverge significantly. The Quadro K4000 packs 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, while the Radeon HD 7730M has 1,500 million transistors on a much smaller 123 mm² die. This gives the AMD chip a higher transistor density of 12.2 million per mm² compared to the NVIDIA chip's 11.5 million per mm², though the Quadro has substantially more total silicon area to work with.

The compute resources tell a similar story of NVIDIA having more hardware but AMD being more compact. The Quadro K4000 features 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs, while the Radeon HD 7730M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This translates into a significant throughput advantage for the Quadro: 1,244.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 691.2 GFLOPS for the Radeon, and texture rates of 51.84 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s. The pixel rates are closer, 12.96 GPixel/s for the Quadro against 10.80 GPixel/s for the Radeon, but the NVIDIA part still leads.

Memory architecture is another major differentiator. The Quadro K4000 uses 3 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 134.8 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Radeon HD 7730M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, providing only 28.80 GB/s. This is a massive gap in memory bandwidth, nearly fivefold, and it likely explains why the Quadro K4000 can sustain higher throughput in memory-intensive compute tasks. Clock behavior also differs: the Radeon HD 7730M has a base clock of 575 MHz and a boost clock of 675 MHz, while the Quadro K4000's core clocks are not recorded in the database, leaving only its memory clock of 1,404 MHz (5.6 Gbps effective) for comparison.

The Verdict

The data points in different directions depending on what metric matters most. For raw OpenCL compute, the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 wins the direct comparison by 3.4%, and its hardware specifications support this result. It has more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, higher FP32 throughput, and vastly more memory bandwidth at 134.8 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s. Any workload that stresses memory access or parallel math will favor the Quadro K4000.

For average benchmark consistency across different APIs, the AMD Radeon HD 7730M has the edge with an average score of 6,581 against the Quadro K4000's 5,982. This is partly because the Quadro's Metal score of 4,166 is notably lower than its OpenCL and Vulkan results, suggesting that its performance varies significantly by API. The Radeon's single recorded result is more uniform, though this could also indicate a lack of testing breadth.

The choice between these two ultimately depends on the intended use case. The Quadro K4000 is a workstation card designed for professional applications, with a single-slot form factor, a 6-pin power connector, and a 250 W suggested PSU. It was released later, in February 2013, and carries a launch MSRP of 1,269 USD. The Radeon HD 7730M is a mobile GPU with a 25 W TDP, released in April 2012, and is suited for laptops where power draw is a primary constraint. The Quadro K4000 is the stronger performer in direct compute tests, but the Radeon HD 7730M offers a better average score profile and far lower power consumption.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the direct OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 6,816 against the AMD Radeon HD 7730M's 6,581, a 3.4% difference.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon HD 7730M have a higher average benchmark score?

A: Yes, the Radeon HD 7730M has an average benchmark score of 6,581, while the Quadro K4000 averages 5,982 across all its recorded tests.

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs use?

A: The Quadro K4000 has 3 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus with 134.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Radeon HD 7730M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Radeon HD 7730M has a TDP of 25 W, while the Quadro K4000 has a TDP of 80 W and requires a 6-pin power connector with a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: What are the architectural differences between the two?

A: The Radeon HD 7730M uses AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture with the Chelsea chip, while the Quadro K4000 uses NVIDIA's Kepler architecture with the GK106 chip. Both are 28 nm parts from TSMC.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Quadro K4000 has 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, compared to the Radeon HD 7730M's 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon HD 7730M | NVIDIA Quadro K4000 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |

| Chip | Chelsea | GK106 |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 2,540 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 221 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 11.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 575 MHz | Not recorded |

| Boost Clock | 675 MHz | Not recorded |

| Memory Clock | 900 MHz, 1800 Mbps effective | 1404 MHz, 5.6 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 3 GB |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 28.80 GB/s | 134.8 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 768 |

| TMUs | 32 | 64 |

| ROPs | 16 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 10.80 GPixel/s | 12.96 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 21.60 GTexel/s | 51.84 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 691.2 GFLOPS | 1,244.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 25 W | 80 W |

| Slot Width | Not recorded | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not recorded | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not recorded | 250 W |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.2.175 |

| Dimensions | Not recorded | 241 mm length, 111 mm height |

| Release Date | 2012-04-23 | 2013-02-28 |

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

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | 1,269 USD |

| OpenCL Score | 6,581 | 6,816 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 6,581 | 5,982 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 38 | 34 |