AMD Radeon HD 8790M vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 and AMD Radeon HD 8790M are both 28 nm parts from the same era, but they target very different physical and performance segments. The Quadro K4000 is a single-slot workstation card with a 241 mm length, while the Radeon HD 8790M is an MXM module designed for portable devices. Benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the specific workloads and API tests reveal where each part can still hold its own.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison between these two GPUs is decisive, with the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 winning both available benchmark tests. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Quadro K4000 scores 6,816 points against the Radeon HD 8790M's 5,017 points. That is a 35.9% advantage for NVIDIA, a massive gap that reflects the fundamental difference in compute resources between the two cards. The Quadro K4000 carries 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, while the Radeon HD 8790M is equipped with 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs. The raw shader count alone is double, and the texture and pixel throughput differences are even more pronounced.

The Geekbench Vulkan test narrows the gap considerably, but the NVIDIA card still comes out ahead. The Quadro K4000 scores 6,964 points versus 6,365 points for the Radeon HD 8790M, a 9.4% delta. This smaller margin in Vulkan suggests that the GCN 1.0 architecture in the AMD part handles the lower-level API more efficiently relative to its hardware resources. Still, the Quadro K4000 wins outright, and the data shows no benchmark where the Radeon HD 8790M takes the lead. The wins column is 2-0 in favor of NVIDIA.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the Quadro K4000 posts 5,982 points across all tests, while the Radeon HD 8790M averages 5,691 points. That is a 5.1% difference in aggregate performance. The percentile rankings reinforce this: the Quadro K4000 sits at the 34th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon HD 8790M sits at the 33rd percentile. Both cards are near the bottom of the modern GPU landscape, but the NVIDIA part is consistently a step ahead.

The nearest rival data for the Quadro K4000 shows it trading blows with other entry-level workstation parts. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M averages 5,986 points, just 0.1% higher than the desktop K4000, and the AMD FirePro W4100 also averages 5,987 points, another 0.1% gap. The AMD Radeon HD 8750M trails by 0.2% at 5,970 points. Even the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server, a vastly different product, only scores 5,996 points in this particular benchmark metric, which highlights how synthetic averages can flatten out architectural differences.

For the Radeon HD 8790M, its nearest rivals include the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 at 5,712 points (0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX at 5,721 points (0.5% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti at 5,731 points (0.7% ahead). The only GPU it beats in its immediate rival group is the NVIDIA Quadro M500M, which scores 5,604 points, 1.6% behind the AMD part. This places the Radeon HD 8790M in a very tight cluster of older mobile and low-end desktop GPUs.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 wins outright in both OpenCL and Vulkan compute workloads. Its 35.9% lead in OpenCL is the standout result, driven by the massive difference in compute resources. The Quadro K4000 delivers 1,244.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Radeon HD 8790M manages only 691.2 GFLOPS. That is an 80% raw compute advantage for NVIDIA. The texture rate tells a similar story: 51.84 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s. For any workload that leans on general-purpose GPU compute, the Quadro K4000 is the clear choice.

The Radeon HD 8790M has no benchmark wins to its name, but there are scenarios where the gap narrows to a more competitive level. In the Vulkan test, the AMD part comes within 9.4% of the NVIDIA card. That is a much smaller margin than the OpenCL gap, suggesting that GCN 1.0's architecture is better suited to the Vulkan API's explicit control model. The Radeon HD 8790M also has a higher transistor density at 12.3M transistors per mm² compared to the Quadro K4000's 11.5M per mm², indicating a more efficient packing of its 950 million transistors into a 77 mm² die. The Quadro K4000 uses 2,540 million transistors across a 221 mm² die.

For mobile deployments, the Radeon HD 8790M's MXM form factor is the only viable option of the two. The Quadro K4000 is a 241 mm long, single-slot card with a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 250 W suggested PSU. The Radeon HD 8790M is a portable device module with no power connectors and no suggested PSU, making it the only choice for laptops or compact systems. The Quadro K4000 also requires a full PCIe 2.0 x16 slot, while the Radeon HD 8790M uses an MXM-A (3.0) interface.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 has an average benchmark score of 5,982 points, while the AMD Radeon HD 8790M averages 5,691 points.

Q: How large is the performance gap in OpenCL?

A: The Quadro K4000 scores 6,816 points in Geekbench OpenCL versus 5,017 points for the Radeon HD 8790M, a 35.9% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Does the Radeon HD 8790M win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the Quadro K4000 winning both the OpenCL and Vulkan tests, with a 2-0 win record.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 compute performance?

A: The Quadro K4000 delivers 1,244.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Radeon HD 8790M delivers 691.2 GFLOPS.

Q: Are these GPUs comparable in form factor?

A: No. The Quadro K4000 is a single-slot, 241 mm long PCIe card, while the Radeon HD 8790M is an MXM module for portable devices.

Q: How do these cards rank against all other GPUs?

A: The Quadro K4000 sits at the 34th percentile of all GPUs, and the Radeon HD 8790M sits at the 33rd percentile.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ on nearly every measurable specification. The Quadro K4000 uses the GK106 chip with 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, while the Radeon HD 8790M uses the Mars chip with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. Memory configuration is another major split: the Quadro K4000 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 134.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Radeon HD 8790M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock also differs, with the Quadro K4000 running at 1,404 MHz (5.6 Gbps effective) versus 1,000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for the AMD part.

Compute resources are heavily skewed toward NVIDIA. The Quadro K4000 has 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, compared to 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs on the Radeon HD 8790M. The Quadro K4000 also has a base clock listed as null in the data but shows a memory clock of 1,404 MHz, while the Radeon HD 8790M has a base clock of 850 MHz and a boost clock of 900 MHz. Pixel rate is 12.96 GPixel/s for NVIDIA versus 7.200 GPixel/s for AMD, and texture rate is 51.84 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s.

Power and physical specifications diverge completely. The Quadro K4000 has an 80 W TDP, a single-slot design, a 1x 6-pin power connector, and a 250 W suggested PSU. The Radeon HD 8790M has no listed TDP, uses an MXM module form factor, has no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The bus interface is PCIe 2.0 x16 for the Quadro K4000 and MXM-A (3.0) for the Radeon HD 8790M. Display outputs are 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 for NVIDIA, while AMD's outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

The launch MSRP for the Quadro K4000 is 1,269 USD. The Radeon HD 8790M has no launch MSRP listed. Release dates are close, with the Quadro K4000 launching on 2013-02-28 and the Radeon HD 8790M on 2013-03-31. Both are end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is between NVIDIA's Kepler and AMD's GCN 1.0. The Quadro K4000 is built on the Kepler architecture with the GK106 chip, part of the Quadro Kepler (Kx000) generation. The Radeon HD 8790M uses GCN 1.0 with the Mars chip, part of the Solar System (HD 8700M) generation. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but the transistor density differs slightly: 11.5M transistors per mm² for the Quadro K4000 versus 12.3M per mm² for the Radeon HD 8790M.

The Kepler architecture in the Quadro K4000 is designed around a larger die with more execution resources. The 2,540 million transistors enable 768 shading units and a 192-bit memory bus. GCN 1.0 in the Radeon HD 8790M uses a much smaller 77 mm² die with 950 million transistors, but the higher transistor density shows that AMD packed more logic per square millimeter. The Radeon HD 8790M's predecessor is listed as London, with the successor being Gem System, while the Quadro K4000's predecessor is Quadro Fermi and its successor is Quadro Maxwell.

API support shows minor differences. The Quadro K4000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the Radeon HD 8790M supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Neither GPU has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The memory type is GDDR5 for both, but the Quadro K4000's 192-bit bus versus the Radeon HD 8790M's 128-bit bus is the defining memory architecture difference, leading to the 134.8 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s bandwidth gap. The Quadro K4000's FP32 output of 1,244.2 GFLOPS is nearly double the Radeon HD 8790M's 691.2 GFLOPS, which is the architectural consequence of having twice the shading units and a higher memory bandwidth to feed them.