AMD Radeon HD 8690M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000M Comparison

The benchmark data places the AMD Radeon HD 8690M and NVIDIA Quadro K4000M on nearly equal footing in raw compute, but their underlying architectures and specifications tell a story of two very different design philosophies. The AMD card edges out a narrow victory in the single available benchmark, yet the NVIDIA card counters with a substantial hardware resource advantage that suggests different workload characteristics.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is a tight race. The AMD Radeon HD 8690M scores 6137 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M trails slightly at 5986 points. This gives the AMD card a 2.5% performance advantage. In percentile terms, the AMD card ranks in the 36th percentile of all GPUs, whereas the NVIDIA card sits just below at the 34th percentile. That 2.5% delta is within the margin of error for many real-world workloads, but in the data it is a clear win for AMD.

Looking at the rival landscape for the AMD card, its score of 6137 places it 0.3% ahead of the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 (6117), 1% ahead of both the NVIDIA RTX A400 (6078) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (6077), and 1.2% behind the AMD Radeon HD 6950 (6210). The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M, meanwhile, matches its nearest rivals almost exactly: it is statistically tied with the AMD FirePro W4100 (5987) at a 0% delta, 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 (5982), 0.2% behind the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server (5996), and 0.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (6000).

The most striking feature of this head-to-head is not the 2.5% delta but the fact that the NVIDIA card achieves near-parity with far fewer raw clock cycles. The AMD card boosts to 975 MHz, while the NVIDIA card is locked at 601 MHz. Yet the NVIDIA card still comes within 2.5% in the benchmark. That speaks to the NVIDIA card's much larger execution engine, as detailed in the architecture section below.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but nuanced conclusion: the AMD Radeon HD 8690M wins the compute benchmark outright, but the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M is the more capable hardware platform. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD card is the winner with 6137 points versus 5986 points. If the sole criterion is this benchmark score, the AMD card is the pick.

However, the specification sheet reveals that the NVIDIA card is a different class of silicon. It carries 960 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units — versus the AMD card's 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. That is a 3x advantage in shading units, a 4x advantage in texture units, and a 4x advantage in ROPs. The NVIDIA card also has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 89.60 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to the AMD card's 2 GB on a 64-bit bus with 32.00 GB/s. For workloads that scale with memory bandwidth or parallel throughput — such as texture-heavy rendering or large data transfers — the NVIDIA card is the better choice despite its lower benchmark score.

The verdict from the data: choose the AMD Radeon HD 8690M for the best raw OpenCL compute score in this pairing. Choose the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M for its superior hardware specifications, particularly memory bandwidth and execution resources, which are not reflected in this particular benchmark.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and design intents. The AMD Radeon HD 8690M is built on the Graphics Core Next 1.0 (GCN 1.0) architecture, using the Sun chip. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M uses the Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip.

The most dramatic difference is in transistor count and die size. The NVIDIA chip packs 3,540 million transistors onto a 294 mm² die. The AMD chip contains just 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die. That is a 5.1x difference in transistor count. Interestingly, the transistor density is nearly identical: AMD achieves 12.3 million transistors per mm², while NVIDIA achieves 12.0 million per mm². Both are manufactured on the same 28 nm process at TSMC.

The clock speeds diverge sharply. The AMD card runs at a base clock of 925 MHz with a boost up to 975 MHz. The NVIDIA card is fixed at 601 MHz for both base and boost. The AMD card's higher clocks partially compensate for its smaller execution engine. The memory clocks also differ: AMD uses 1000 MHz memory with 4 Gbps effective speed, while NVIDIA uses 700 MHz with 2.8 Gbps effective.

Memory configuration is another major architectural split. The AMD card has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus. The NVIDIA card has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The bus width difference is the key factor: 256-bit versus 64-bit gives the NVIDIA card its 2.8x bandwidth advantage (89.60 GB/s vs 32.00 GB/s).

API support shows a slight edge for AMD in one area. Both support DirectX 12 (with AMD at 11_1 and NVIDIA at 11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan. The Vulkan version differs: AMD supports 1.2.170 while NVIDIA supports 1.2.175. The NVIDIA card also carries a 100 W TDP and uses an MXM Module slot with no power connectors, whereas the AMD card has no TDP or slot width listed in the data.

Specification Differences

The specification tables reveal systematic differences across nearly every category. The AMD Radeon HD 8690M has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M has 960 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Texture fill rate favors NVIDIA at 48.08 GTexel/s versus 19.50 GTexel/s. Pixel fill rate favors NVIDIA at 12.02 GPixel/s versus 7.800 GPixel/s. Floating point performance favors NVIDIA at 1,153.9 GFLOPS versus 624.0 GFLOPS.

Memory capacity and bandwidth both favor NVIDIA: 4 GB versus 2 GB, and 89.60 GB/s versus 32.00 GB/s. The bus interface differs as well: the AMD card uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the NVIDIA card uses MXM-B (3.0). Display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent" for NVIDIA, with no listing for AMD.

Release dates differ by roughly nine months: the AMD card launched on 2013-02-28, while the NVIDIA card launched on 2012-05-31. Both are end-of-life products. The AMD card's predecessor is "London" and successor is "Gem System." The NVIDIA card's predecessor is "Quadro Fermi-M" and successor is "Quadro Maxwell-M." Both cards are from their respective families: the AMD from the Solar System (HD 8600M) generation, and the NVIDIA from the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx000M) generation.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8690M scores 6137 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 2.5% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M's score of 5986.

Q: How much more memory bandwidth does the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M have?

A: The NVIDIA card has 89.60 GB/s of bandwidth compared to the AMD card's 32.00 GB/s, a 2.8x advantage driven by its 256-bit bus versus the AMD card's 64-bit bus.

Q: What are the transistor counts of these two GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M contains 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the AMD Radeon HD 8690M contains 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die. Both are built on a 28 nm process at TSMC.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: Both support DirectX 12, but the AMD card supports version 12 (11_1) while the NVIDIA card supports version 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan versions are 1.2.170 for AMD and 1.2.175 for NVIDIA.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M has 960 shading units, which is three times the 320 shading units found on the AMD Radeon HD 8690M.

Q: What is the clock speed difference?

A: The AMD card runs at a base clock of 925 MHz with a boost to 975 MHz. The NVIDIA card is fixed at 601 MHz for both base and boost clocks.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon HD 8690M wins in the single benchmark test available: Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 6137 against the NVIDIA's 5986. It also has a higher boost clock (975 MHz vs 601 MHz) and a higher base clock (925 MHz vs 601 MHz). For any workload that is sensitive to raw clock speed or that performs well in this specific OpenCL test, the AMD card is the winner.

The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M wins across the broader specification sheet. It has more than double the floating point performance (1,153.9 GFLOPS vs 624.0 GFLOPS), more than double the texture fill rate (48.08 GTexel/s vs 19.50 GTexel/s), and more than 1.5x the pixel fill rate (12.02 GPixel/s vs 7.800 GPixel/s). It has 4x the memory capacity (4 GB vs 2 GB) and 2.8x the memory bandwidth (89.60 GB/s vs 32.00 GB/s). The NVIDIA card also has 960 shading units versus 320, 80 TMUs versus 20, and 32 ROPs versus 8.

The use-case split is clear from this data. For compute workloads that resemble the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD card delivers the higher score. For memory-intensive tasks such as large texture datasets, high-resolution framebuffers, or any workload that benefits from the 256-bit memory bus, the NVIDIA card is the stronger candidate. The NVIDIA card's 4 GB memory capacity and 89.60 GB/s bandwidth make it the better fit for professional rendering and CAD-style workloads that require large working sets. The AMD card's higher clocks and smaller die make it a more efficient choice for lighter compute tasks where the 2.5% benchmark advantage holds.