AMD Radeon HD 8750M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000M Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M and AMD Radeon HD 8750M are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from the 2012-2013 era, targeting professional and mainstream laptop segments respectively. Despite their different market positions, benchmark data places them nearly neck-and-neck in raw compute performance, with the Quadro K4000M holding a razor-thin lead. This analysis breaks down the architectural differences, performance head-to-head results, and use-case implications based strictly on the provided specifications and benchmark scores.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M scores 5986, while the AMD Radeon HD 8750M scores 5970. The Quadro K4000M wins this single head-to-head benchmark by a 0.3% margin.

Q: How do these two GPUs compare in transistor count and die size?

A: The Quadro K4000M contains 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the Radeon HD 8750M contains 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. The transistor density is nearly identical at 12.0M per mm² for the NVIDIA chip and 12.3M per mm² for the AMD chip.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?

A: The Quadro K4000M features 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 89.60 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon HD 8750M has 1024 MB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher clock speed?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8750M operates with a base clock of 775 MHz and a boost clock of 825 MHz. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M runs at a fixed 601 MHz for both base and boost clocks.

Q: How do the shading unit counts differ between the two cards?

A: The Quadro K4000M has 960 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The Radeon HD 8750M has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units.

Q: What is the pixel and texture fill rate for each GPU?

A: The Quadro K4000M achieves 12.02 GPixel/s pixel rate and 48.08 GTexel/s texture rate. The Radeon HD 8750M achieves 6.600 GPixel/s and 19.80 GTexel/s respectively.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M is built on the Kepler architecture using the GK104 chip, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. This is a substantial die containing 3,540 million transistors across 294 mm², yielding a transistor density of 12.0M per mm². The architecture generation is designated as Quadro Kepler-M (Kx000M), representing NVIDIA's professional mobile lineup of that era. The GPU supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175.

The AMD Radeon HD 8750M uses the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Mars chip, also fabricated by TSMC at 28 nm. This is a much smaller implementation at 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, giving a slightly higher transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The generation is labeled Solar System (HD 8700M), part of AMD's mainstream mobile segment. API support includes DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, with the DirectX version being marginally newer than NVIDIA's.

The most dramatic architectural difference lies in the compute and memory subsystems. The Quadro K4000M packs 960 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, paired with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus. The Radeon HD 8750M counters with 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs, using 1024 MB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus. This gives NVIDIA a 2.5x advantage in shading units, over 3x in TMUs, and 4x in ROPs. The memory bandwidth gap is even wider: 89.60 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s, a 3.1x difference.

Clock speeds tell the opposite story. AMD runs the Mars chip at 775 MHz base and 825 MHz boost, while NVIDIA locks the GK104 at 601 MHz for both base and boost. The higher AMD clocks partially compensate for the smaller architecture, but the raw throughput numbers still favor NVIDIA: 1,153.9 GFLOPS FP32 versus 633.6 GFLOPS, and 48.08 GTexel/s versus 19.80 GTexel/s. The bus interface also differs, with NVIDIA using MXM-B (3.0) and AMD using PCIe 3.0 x8.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only available head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, where the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M scores 5986 against the AMD Radeon HD 8750M's 5970. The delta is a mere 0.3%, making this effectively a statistical tie. The Quadro K4000M wins this single test, giving it a 1-0 record in wins. However, this marginal difference suggests that real-world compute workloads would see no perceptible performance gap between these two cards.

Context from nearest rivals reinforces this picture. The Quadro K4000M's closest competitors include the AMD FirePro W4100 at 5987 (0% delta), the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 at 5982 (0.1% ahead), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server at 5996 (0.2% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M at 6000 (0.2% behind). The Radeon HD 8750M sits near the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 at 5982 (0.2% behind), the NVIDIA Quadro K620M at 5957 (0.2% ahead), the AMD Radeon HD 8730M at 5955 (0.3% ahead), and the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M at 5986 (0.3% behind).

Both GPUs occupy the 34th percentile among all GPUs, placing them in the lower-mid range of the performance spectrum. The clustering of all these scores between 5955 and 6000 indicates that this performance band is densely populated with both mobile and desktop parts from multiple generations. Neither card distinguishes itself from the pack; they are interchangeable in compute performance.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear conclusion: these two GPUs deliver virtually identical OpenCL compute performance, with the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M edging ahead by 0.3%. The Quadro K4000M wins the sole head-to-head test, but the margin is negligible and falls well within normal run-to-run variation. For any application relying on OpenCL compute, users would be hard-pressed to notice a difference.

The specification sheets tell a more nuanced story. The Quadro K4000M is the superior hardware on paper: 2.5x more shading units, 4x more ROPs, 3.1x more memory bandwidth, and 1.8x more FP32 throughput. The Radeon HD 8750M counters with higher clocks and a slightly newer DirectX version, but these advantages do not translate into benchmark wins. The Quadro K4000M also offers 4 GB of memory versus 1 GB, which matters for large datasets or multi-display configurations.

For professional workloads requiring certified drivers, the Quadro K4000M is the obvious choice. Its Kepler architecture and MXM form factor target mobile workstations, and the 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer provides headroom for CAD textures and scientific visualization. The Radeon HD 8750M, with its smaller memory footprint and DDR3 bandwidth, is better suited to mainstream consumer laptops where the lower power draw and smaller die are practical advantages.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. Process node is identical at 28 nm from TSMC, but transistor count diverges sharply: 3,540 million for the Quadro K4000M versus 950 million for the Radeon HD 8750M. Die size follows suit at 294 mm² versus 77 mm², with transistor density nearly equal at 12.0M and 12.3M per mm² respectively.

Clock speeds favor AMD: 775 MHz base and 825 MHz boost against NVIDIA's flat 601 MHz. Memory configurations are radically different, with the Quadro K4000M offering 4 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus at 89.60 GB/s, while the Radeon HD 8750M has 1024 MB DDR3 on a 128-bit bus at 28.80 GB/s. Memory clock is 700 MHz (2.8 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA and 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) for AMD.

Compute resources strongly favor NVIDIA: 960 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs versus 384, 24, and 8 respectively. Pixel rate is 12.02 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s, texture rate is 48.08 GTexel/s versus 19.80 GTexel/s, and FP32 is 1,153.9 GFLOPS versus 633.6 GFLOPS. The Quadro K4000M has a 100 W TDP, while the Radeon HD 8750M has no listed TDP. Bus interface differs between MXM-B (3.0) and PCIe 3.0 x8. DirectX support is 12 (11_0) for NVIDIA and 12 (11_1) for AMD, while OpenGL is 4.6 for both and Vulkan is 1.2.175 versus 1.2.170.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M wins in every measured performance category except clock speed. It takes the single OpenCL benchmark by 0.3%, and its specification sheet dominates in shading units, TMUs, ROPs, memory size, memory bandwidth, pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 throughput. The 4 GB frame buffer and 256-bit memory bus make it suited for memory-intensive professional applications where large textures or complex models exceed 1 GB. The MXM form factor and 100 W TDP indicate it belongs in a workstation-class laptop.

The AMD Radeon HD 8750M wins on clock speed with a 775 MHz base and 825 MHz boost, offering a theoretical advantage in latency-sensitive tasks that do not scale with parallel throughput. Its smaller die and likely lower power consumption make it more appropriate for thinner consumer laptops where thermal constraints are tighter. The PCIe 3.0 x8 interface is more standard for mainstream mobile platforms. Its 1 GB memory allocation is adequate for everyday graphics but will bottleneck on professional workloads.

In practice, the benchmark evidence shows that the Radeon HD 8750M achieves 99.7% of the Quadro K4000M's OpenCL score despite having a fraction of the raw resources. This suggests that AMD's architecture extracts compute efficiency from higher clocks and the GCN design. However, for tasks that stress memory bandwidth or fill rate, the Quadro K4000M's advantages become decisive. The data points to a simple split: the Quadro K4000M for professional compute and graphics, the Radeon HD 8750M for general-purpose mobile use where the benchmark tie is sufficient and the smaller footprint is beneficial.