AMD Radeon HD 8690M vs NVIDIA Quadro 4000M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and it shows a decisive win for the AMD Radeon HD 8690M. The AMD part scores 6137 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M scores 5211 points. That is a 17.8% advantage for the AMD GPU in raw compute throughput. The data indicates a clear single-test victory, with no benchmark in the database where the Quadro 4000M pulls ahead.

The 6137 score places the Radeon HD 8690M at the 36th percentile among all GPUs tracked by the database. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 sits just 0.3% behind at 6117, the NVIDIA RTX A400 is 1% behind at 6078, and the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 also trails by 1% at 6077. Notably, the AMD Radeon HD 6950, a desktop part, sits 1.2% ahead at 6210, meaning the mobile 8690M is within striking distance of a much larger desktop card from the same era.

The Quadro 4000M's 5211 score lands it at the 30th percentile. Its closest comparisons are equally tight: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M is 0.5% ahead at 5236, the AMD Radeon R7 M260X is 1% behind at 5161, and the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M is 1.1% behind at 5154. The GeForce 940M sits 1.4% ahead at 5284. These deltas are small, indicating that the Quadro 4000M sits in a dense performance band where small architectural differences translate to single-digit percentage changes.

The head-to-head delta of 17.8% is substantial, especially given how close each GPU's own rival cluster is. The AMD card is not merely edging out its competitors; it is delivering a step-function improvement over the older NVIDIA workstation part. Benchmark results indicate that on pure compute workloads, the mobile Radeon from 2013 outperforms the mobile Quadro from 2011 by a wide margin.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is significant and explains the benchmark outcome. The AMD Radeon HD 8690M uses the Sun chip, built on GCN 1.0 architecture, belonging to the Solar System generation (HD 8600M). It is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M uses the GF104 chip, built on Fermi architecture, part of the Quadro Fermi-M generation (x000M). It uses a 40 nm process, also at TSMC.

Transistor counts reveal the generational leap. The AMD chip packs 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip has 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, for a density of 5.9 million per square millimeter. The AMD chip is far smaller and denser, a direct result of the newer 28 nm node versus the older 40 nm node.

Memory configurations differ notably. Both have 2 GB of GDDR5, but the AMD part uses a 64-bit bus with 32.00 GB/s bandwidth, running at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA part uses a 256-bit bus with 80.00 GB/s bandwidth, running at 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective). The Quadro has 2.5 times the memory bandwidth, yet still loses the compute benchmark, which suggests the AMD architecture extracts more performance per byte of memory throughput.

Compute resources are comparable on paper. The AMD card has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units. The NVIDIA card has 336 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The NVIDIA part has more texture units and ROPs, plus slightly more shading units, yet the AMD card wins. Pixel rates are close: 7.800 GPixel/s for AMD versus 6.650 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rates favor NVIDIA: 26.60 GTexel/s versus 19.50 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is nearly identical: 624.0 GFLOPS for AMD versus 638.4 GFLOPS for NVIDIA. The AMD GPU achieves similar FP32 with fewer resources, pointing to better instruction efficiency per clock.

API support diverges. The AMD part supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA part supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support recorded. Power and form factor also differ: the Quadro 4000M carries a 100 W TDP, uses an MXM Module slot width, has no power connectors, and connects via MXM-B (3.0). The Radeon HD 8690M has no TDP listed in the database, no slot width, and uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs on the Quadro are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," while the AMD card has no display output data recorded.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the recorded data, the AMD Radeon HD 8690M wins the only benchmark in the database. The 17.8% lead in Geekbench OpenCL indicates that for general-purpose compute tasks, OpenCL workloads, and any application that scales with shader throughput, the AMD part is the stronger choice. Its higher percentile ranking (36th versus 30th) reinforces this across the broader GPU landscape.

However, the Quadro 4000M has structural advantages in areas not captured by the single benchmark. Its 2.5x memory bandwidth (80.00 GB/s versus 32.00 GB/s) suggests that memory-bound workloads, such as large texture fetches, framebuffer-heavy rendering, or data-intensive compute kernels, could favor the NVIDIA part. The higher texture rate (26.60 GTexel/s versus 19.50 GTexel/s) and more ROPs (32 versus 8) imply better fill-rate performance for traditional graphics rendering, even though the AMD card wins the compute test. The Quadro's 100 W TDP also indicates it was designed for sustained professional workloads, whereas the AMD card's power budget is not recorded.

The AMD card's advantage in API support, particularly Vulkan 1.2.170, gives it a forward-looking edge for modern applications that leverage Vulkan for compute or graphics. The NVIDIA card lacks Vulkan entirely in the database record. For legacy DirectX 11 workloads, both cards are capable, with the AMD part supporting 11_1 and the NVIDIA part supporting 11_0.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8690M scores 6137, while the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M scores 5211. The AMD part leads by 17.8%.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Radeon HD 8690M is 0.3% ahead of the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200, 1% ahead of both the NVIDIA RTX A400 and GeForce MX230, and 1.2% behind the AMD Radeon HD 6950. The Quadro 4000M is 0.5% behind the GeForce GTX 760M, 1% ahead of the Radeon R7 M260X, 1.1% ahead of the Quadro K3100M, and 1.4% behind the GeForce 940M.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth specifications for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8690M has 32.00 GB/s bandwidth via a 64-bit bus with GDDR5 at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M has 80.00 GB/s bandwidth via a 256-bit bus with GDDR5 at 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective).

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: No. The AMD Radeon HD 8690M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support recorded.

Q: What are the transistor counts and die sizes?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8690M has 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die (12.3M per mm²). The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M has 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die (5.9M per mm²).

Q: What is the TDP of the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M?

A: The Quadro 4000M has a TDP of 100 W. The Radeon HD 8690M has no TDP listed in the database.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon HD 8690M | NVIDIA Quadro 4000M |

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

| Chip | Sun | GF104 |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi |

| Generation | Solar System (HD 8600M) | Quadro Fermi-M (x000M) |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 690 million | 1,950 million |

| Die Size | 56 mm² | 332 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.3M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) | 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 32.00 GB/s | 80.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 320 | 336 |

| TMUs | 20 | 56 |

| ROPs | 8 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.800 GPixel/s | 6.650 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 19.50 GTexel/s | 26.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 624.0 GFLOPS | 638.4 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not listed | 100 W |

| Slot Width | Not listed | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |

| Display Outputs | Not listed | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | None |

| Release Date | 2013-02-28 | 2011-02-21 |

| Predecessor | London | Quadro FX Mobile |

| Successor | Gem System | Quadro Kepler-M |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 6137 | 5211 |

| Percentile | 36 | 30 |

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear picture for compute-focused workloads. The AMD Radeon HD 8690M wins the only recorded test by 17.8%, and it holds a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs. For OpenCL compute tasks, shader-heavy workloads, or any application that leverages the newer GCN architecture, the AMD part is the stronger option. Its support for Vulkan 1.2.170 also makes it more compatible with modern compute and graphics APIs.

The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M, despite losing the compute benchmark, has substantial hardware features that the AMD card lacks. Its 80.00 GB/s memory bandwidth, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs indicate that traditional graphics rendering, texture-heavy scenes, and memory-intensive operations may run differently than the OpenCL score suggests. The 100 W TDP also points to a professional-grade design intended for sustained workloads in mobile workstations. However, the database does not include any benchmark that captures these strengths, so the data cannot confirm a scenario where the Quadro outperforms the Radeon.

Given the recorded measurements, the AMD Radeon HD 8690M is the better choice for compute performance and modern API compatibility. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M remains relevant only for scenarios where its higher memory bandwidth and fill-rate capabilities might compensate, but no data in the database supports that claim. The verdict from the numbers is decisive: the AMD part dominates the single benchmark recorded, and the Quadro's architectural advantages do not translate into a recorded win.