AMD Radeon HD 8690M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000 Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark between the AMD Radeon HD 8690M and the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are decisive. The Quadro K4000 scores 6816, while the Radeon HD 8690M scores 6137. That gives the NVIDIA card a 10% advantage in raw compute throughput, which is a meaningful gap for any workload that stresses general-purpose GPU computation.

Looking at the broader context from the nearest rival comparisons, the Radeon HD 8690M sits in a tight cluster of similar performers. It edges out the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 by 0.3%, matches the NVIDIA RTX A400 and GeForce MX230 within 1%, and trails the AMD Radeon HD 6950 by 1.2%. The Quadro K4000, by contrast, is nearly tied with its own nearest rivals—it sits within 0.2% of the Quadro K4000M, the AMD FirePro W4100, and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server, and only 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 8750M. This tells us the K4000's OpenCL lead over the 8690M is not an outlier; it is a consistent result across its competitive set.

The Quadro K4000 also has additional benchmark data beyond OpenCL. In Geekbench Metal, it scores 4166, and in Geekbench Vulkan it reaches 6964. The Radeon HD 8690M has no corresponding Metal or Vulkan scores in the data, so cross-API comparison is impossible. However, the Vulkan score of 6964 is notably higher than its own OpenCL score, suggesting the K4000's compute performance may be API-dependent. The OpenCL result remains the only apples-to-apples metric, and it favors the NVIDIA card by 10%.

# Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages, and the data reflects that divergence. The AMD Radeon HD 8690M is built on GCN 1.0 architecture, using the Sun chip, and belongs to the Solar System generation (HD 8600M). The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 uses the Kepler architecture with the GK106 chip, part of the Quadro Kepler (Kx000) generation. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, so the process node itself is identical.

The transistor budgets tell a stark story. The Quadro K4000 packs 2,540 million transistors into a 221 mm² die, while the Radeon HD 8690M has only 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die. That is a 3.7x difference in transistor count and a 3.9x difference in die area. Interestingly, the transistor density is slightly higher on the AMD chip—12.3M per mm² versus 11.5M per mm²—but the raw scale advantage belongs to NVIDIA. The Quadro K4000's larger die allows for substantially more execution resources.

The shading unit count reinforces this. The Quadro K4000 has 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs. The Radeon HD 8690M has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. That is a 2.4x advantage in shading units, a 3.2x advantage in TMUs, and a 3x advantage in ROPs. These are not marginal differences; they represent a fundamentally larger GPU on the NVIDIA side.

The memory subsystems also diverge sharply. The Quadro K4000 uses 3 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding 134.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon HD 8690M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, with 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth. That is a 4.2x bandwidth advantage for the NVIDIA card, which directly impacts texture-heavy and bandwidth-bound workloads. The memory clock on the K4000 is 1404 MHz (5.6 Gbps effective), while the 8690M runs at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective).

Other differences include the bus interface: the Radeon HD 8690M uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the Quadro K4000 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The API support differs slightly—the AMD card lists DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the NVIDIA card lists DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the Vulkan version is marginally newer on the NVIDIA side.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 scores 6816 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon HD 8690M scores 6137. The Quadro K4000 wins by 10%.

Q: How do the two compare in terms of memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro K4000 has 134.8 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Radeon HD 8690M has 32.00 GB/s. The NVIDIA card offers more than four times the memory bandwidth.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two?

A: The Quadro K4000 has 2,540 million transistors, while the Radeon HD 8690M has 690 million. The NVIDIA chip has roughly 3.7 times as many transistors.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The Radeon HD 8690M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the Quadro K4000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the Vulkan versions differ slightly (1.2.170 for AMD, 1.2.175 for NVIDIA).

Q: What is the pixel rate of each card?

A: The Quadro K4000 achieves 12.96 GPixel/s, while the Radeon HD 8690M achieves 7.800 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA card has a higher pixel throughput.

Q: How does the Quadro K4000's Vulkan score compare to its OpenCL score?

A: The Quadro K4000 scores 6964 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is higher than its OpenCL score of 6816. It also has a Metal score of 4166.

# Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: Sun (AMD) vs GK106 (NVIDIA)
• Architecture: GCN 1.0 vs Kepler
• Generation: Solar System (HD 8600M) vs Quadro Kepler (Kx000)
• Transistors: 690 million vs 2,540 million
• Die Size: 56 mm² vs 221 mm²
• Transistor Density: 12.3M / mm² vs 11.5M / mm²
• Base Clock: 925 MHz (AMD) vs not specified (NVIDIA)
• Boost Clock: 975 MHz (AMD) vs not specified (NVIDIA)
• Memory Clock: 1000 MHz / 4 Gbps effective (AMD) vs 1404 MHz / 5.6 Gbps effective (NVIDIA)
• Memory Size: 2 GB vs 3 GB
• Memory Bus Width: 64 bit vs 192 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 32.00 GB/s vs 134.8 GB/s
• Shading Units: 320 vs 768
• TMUs: 20 vs 64
• ROPs: 8 vs 24
• Pixel Rate: 7.800 GPixel/s vs 12.96 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 19.50 GTexel/s vs 51.84 GTexel/s
• FP32: 624.0 GFLOPS vs 1,244.2 GFLOPS
• TDP: not specified (AMD) vs 80 W (NVIDIA)
• Slot Width: not specified (AMD) vs Single-slot (NVIDIA)
• Power Connectors: not specified (AMD) vs 1x 6-pin (NVIDIA)
• Suggested PSU: not specified (AMD) vs 250 W (NVIDIA)
• Bus Interface: PCIe 3.0 x8 vs PCIe 2.0 x16
• Display Outputs: not specified (AMD) vs 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 (NVIDIA)
• Dimensions: not specified (AMD) vs 241 mm (9.5 inches) long, 111 mm (4.4 inches) high (NVIDIA)
• DirectX: 12 (11_1) vs 12 (11_0)
• Vulkan: 1.2.170 vs 1.2.175
• Predecessor: London vs Quadro Fermi
• Successor: Gem System vs Quadro Maxwell
• Launch MSRP: not specified (AMD) vs 1,269 USD (NVIDIA)
• Benchmarks: 6137 (OpenCL, AMD) vs 4166 (Metal), 6816 (OpenCL), 6964 (Vulkan) (NVIDIA)
• Percentile: 36 (AMD) vs 34 (NVIDIA)
• Average Benchmark Score: 6137 (AMD) vs 5982 (NVIDIA)

# The Verdict

The data presents a clear picture: the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 is the more capable GPU in raw compute terms. Its 10% OpenCL lead over the Radeon HD 8690M is backed by a substantially larger silicon footprint—2,540 million transistors versus 690 million—and a 4.2x memory bandwidth advantage. The K4000 also delivers more than double the FP32 throughput (1,244.2 GFLOPS vs 624.0 GFLOPS) and higher pixel and texture rates.

That said, the average benchmark score tells a different story. The Radeon HD 8690M has an average benchmark score of 6137, while the Quadro K4000 averages 5982. This is because the K4000's Metal score of 4166 drags down its average. In percentile terms, the 8690M sits at the 36th percentile of all GPUs, while the K4000 sits at the 34th percentile. So while the K4000 wins the head-to-head OpenCL test, its overall standing is marginally lower.

The Radeon HD 8690M also has a smaller physical footprint and lower power requirements—though the data does not specify its TDP, the K4000 draws 80 W and needs a 6-pin power connector plus a 250 W suggested PSU. For users constrained by power or space, the AMD card may be easier to accommodate. The 8690M also uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the K4000 uses PCIe 2.0 x16.

The Quadro K4000 carries a launch MSRP of 1,269 USD, while the Radeon HD 8690M has no listed launch MSRP. Both are end-of-life products, released on the same day (2013-02-28).

# Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA Quadro K4000 wins on raw compute and memory. The 10% OpenCL advantage is the headline result, but the underlying specs amplify it. The 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 24 ROPs versus 320, 20, and 8 respectively mean the K4000 has far more parallel execution capacity. The 134.8 GB/s bandwidth versus 32.00 GB/s means memory-bound workloads will favor the NVIDIA card by a wide margin. The K4000 also prevails in FP32 compute (1,244.2 GFLOPS vs 624.0 GFLOPS), pixel rate (12.96 vs 7.800 GPixel/s), and texture rate (51.84 vs 19.50 GTexel/s). Its Vulkan score of 6964 further suggests strong compute performance under modern APIs.

AMD Radeon HD 8690M wins on efficiency of scale. The 8690M achieves its results with a 56 mm² die, which is roughly one-quarter the size of the K4000's 221 mm² die. Its transistor density is actually slightly higher (12.3M vs 11.5M per mm²), indicating a more compact design. The AMD card also supports a newer DirectX feature level (12 (11_1) vs 12 (11_0)), which may matter for certain application compatibility. Its PCIe 3.0 x8 interface is a newer generation than the K4000's PCIe 2.0 x16, though the K4000 has double the lane count.

The average benchmark score favors AMD. The 8690M's average of 6137 exceeds the K4000's 5982, driven by the K4000's relatively low Metal score of 4166. For users who weigh overall benchmark performance across APIs, the AMD card's consistency may be preferable.

Use-case split: Choose the Quadro K4000 for compute-heavy tasks that leverage OpenCL or Vulkan, especially those that are memory-bandwidth intensive, such as large data transfers or texture-heavy rendering. Choose the Radeon HD 8690M for scenarios where power draw, physical space, or API compatibility with DirectX 11_1 is a priority, or where the higher average benchmark score across multiple APIs matters more than the single OpenCL result.