AMD Radeon Pro 450 vs NVIDIA Quadro P4000 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits these two cards into very different roles. The AMD Radeon Pro 450 wins no head-to-head tests in the database, while the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 takes both of the shared test categories. That is not to say the Radeon Pro 450 is without merit, but its strengths are contextual, tied to its form factor and power envelope, rather than raw output.

The Radeon Pro 450 sits in the 49th percentile of all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 10804. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K2200, which scores 10761 and trails by 0.4%, and the AMD Radeon RX 6600S, which scores 10629 and trails by 1.7%. The picture here is one of a card that lands in the middle of the pack, competitive with older workstation parts and entry-level mobile GPUs, but not pushing into higher tiers. The GeForce MX350 is 0.7% ahead, and the GTX 560 Ti is 1.1% behind, so the Radeon Pro 450 effectively trades blows with a spread of older and lower-end parts.

The Quadro P4000, by contrast, sits in the 47th percentile despite a much higher raw score in individual tests. Its average benchmark score is 9665, dragged down by a set of Passmark legacy tests that score poorly. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100, which is 0.1% behind, and the GeForce GTX 960M, 0.2% behind. The Quadro K5000 is 0.3% behind, and the Tesla C2070 is 0.5% ahead. The percentile ranking reflects the fact that the average across all recorded tests, including older DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 workloads, is not flattering, even though the modern compute tests tell a different story.

The use-case split is clear. The Radeon Pro 450 is a low-power, mobile-oriented part for portable workstations. The Quadro P4000 is a single-slot desktop card with a 105 W TDP and a 1x 6-pin power connector, aimed at sustained professional workloads. The data shows that in every shared benchmark, the Quadro P4000 wins by a wide margin. The Radeon Pro 450 does not win a single measured category.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon Pro 450 uses the Baffin chip built on GCN 4.0, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. It packs 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 24.4 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 uses the GP104 chip on the Pascal architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 16 nm process. It holds 7,200 million transistors on a 314 mm² die, with a density of 22.9 million per square millimeter. The AMD part is denser per area, but the NVIDIA part has more than double the transistor count and a die more than 2.5 times larger on a slightly older node.

Both chips lack dedicated ray tracing cores and tensor cores. The Radeon Pro 450 has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The Quadro P4000 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Those are massive differences in the fundamental processing blocks, explaining why the NVIDIA card produces far higher pixel and texture rates. The Radeon Pro 450 delivers 12.80 GPixel/s and 32.00 GTexel/s. The Quadro P4000 delivers 94.72 GPixel/s and 165.8 GTexel/s.

Compute throughput tells a similar story. The Radeon Pro 450 reaches 1,024.0 GFLOPS of FP32 and the same 1,024.0 GFLOPS of FP16, a 1:1 ratio. The Quadro P4000 reaches 5.304 TFLOPS of FP32 but only 82.88 GFLOPS of FP16, a 1:64 ratio. That FP16 weakness on the NVIDIA part is notable for any workload using reduced precision. The AMD card is far more balanced in that respect, though at a much lower absolute level.

API support also differs. Both cards support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6, but the Radeon Pro 450 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the Quadro P4000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part is one feature level ahead in DirectX 12 and one Vulkan revision ahead.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two shared tests between these cards: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both, the Quadro P4000 dominates, and the margins are enormous.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Radeon Pro 450 scores 9002. The Quadro P4000 scores 36212. That is a delta of -75.1% for the AMD card, meaning the NVIDIA part is roughly four times faster in this compute workload. The gap reflects the difference in shading units, TMUs, and memory bandwidth. OpenCL performance is heavily dependent on raw ALU throughput, and the Pascal card has nearly three times the shading units.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the Radeon Pro 450 scores 10518. The Quadro P4000 scores 41786. That is a delta of -74.8%. Again, the NVIDIA card is roughly four times faster. Vulkan workloads scale with geometry throughput and memory bandwidth, both of which the Quadro P4000 has in abundance. The Radeon Pro 450 has 81.28 GB/s of bandwidth over a 128-bit bus. The Quadro P4000 has 243.3 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, exactly three times the bandwidth.

The Radeon Pro 450 does have its own set of recorded scores. Its Geekbench Metal score is 12893, and its average benchmark score across all tests is 10804. Those numbers are respectable for a 35 W mobile part, but the shared tests with the Quadro P4000 show a chasm in performance. The Quadro P4000 also records a Passmark G3D score of 11466 and a Passmark GPU compute score of 4913, along with legacy DirectX scores of 181 in DirectX 9, 66 in DirectX 10, 86 in DirectX 11, and 40 in DirectX 12. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1115. None of those tests were run on the Radeon Pro 450, so no direct comparison is possible there.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for these two cards differ in nearly every measurable way.

• Process node: AMD uses 14 nm at GlobalFoundries. NVIDIA uses 16 nm at TSMC.
• Transistors: AMD has 3,000 million. NVIDIA has 7,200 million.
• Die size: AMD is 123 mm². NVIDIA is 314 mm².
• Transistor density: AMD is 24.4M / mm². NVIDIA is 22.9M / mm².
• Memory size: AMD has 2 GB GDDR5. NVIDIA has 8 GB GDDR5.
• Memory bus: AMD is 128 bit. NVIDIA is 256 bit.
• Memory bandwidth: AMD is 81.28 GB/s. NVIDIA is 243.3 GB/s.
• Shading units: AMD has 640. NVIDIA has 1792.
• TMUs: AMD has 40. NVIDIA has 112.
• ROPs: AMD has 16. NVIDIA has 64.
• Pixel rate: AMD is 12.80 GPixel/s. NVIDIA is 94.72 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: AMD is 32.00 GTexel/s. NVIDIA is 165.8 GTexel/s.
• FP32: AMD is 1,024.0 GFLOPS. NVIDIA is 5.304 TFLOPS.
• FP16: AMD is 1,024.0 GFLOPS (1:1). NVIDIA is 82.88 GFLOPS (1:64).
• TDP: AMD is 35 W. NVIDIA is 105 W.
• Slot width: AMD is an MXM Module. NVIDIA is Single-slot.
• Power connector: AMD has none listed. NVIDIA uses 1x 6-pin.
• Suggested PSU: AMD has none listed. NVIDIA is 300 W.
• Bus interface: AMD is PCIe 3.0 x8. NVIDIA is PCIe 3.0 x16.
• Display outputs: AMD is Portable Device Dependent. NVIDIA is 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.
• Dimensions: AMD has no listed length or height. NVIDIA is 241 mm (9.5 inches) long and 111 mm (4.4 inches) high.
• Release date: AMD released on 2016-10-29. NVIDIA released on 2017-02-05.
• Launch MSRP: AMD has none listed. NVIDIA is 815 USD.

The NVIDIA card is physically larger, draws three times the power, and requires a dedicated power connector plus a 300 W PSU recommendation. The AMD card is an MXM module, meaning it is designed for laptops and compact workstations, with no external power connector and no standard display outputs.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P4000, with a score of 36212 compared to the AMD Radeon Pro 450's 9002. The AMD card trails by 75.1%.

Q: How does the Radeon Pro 450 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Radeon Pro 450 has an average benchmark score of 10804. It is 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K2200, 1.1% ahead of the GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 1.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6600S, and 0.7% behind the GeForce MX350.

Q: Does the Quadro P4000 have a higher average benchmark score than the Radeon Pro 450?

A: No. The Radeon Pro 450 has an average benchmark score of 10804, while the Quadro P4000 has an average of 9665. The Quadro P4000 wins in the shared Geekbench tests by large margins, but its average is lower because of poor scores in legacy Passmark tests.

Q: What is the FP16 performance of each card?

A: The Radeon Pro 450 delivers 1,024.0 GFLOPS of FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32. The Quadro P4000 delivers 82.88 GFLOPS of FP16 at a 1:64 ratio, which is dramatically weaker.

Q: What memory configuration does each card use?

A: The Radeon Pro 450 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 81.28 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro P4000 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 243.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Radeon Pro 450 has a 35 W TDP and no listed power connector or suggested PSU. The Quadro P4000 has a 105 W TDP, requires a 1x 6-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 300 W.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion for most buyers. The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 is the far more capable card in every measured shared workload. It delivers roughly four times the OpenCL and Vulkan performance of the Radeon Pro 450, with quadruple the memory capacity, triple the memory bandwidth, and far higher pixel and texture rates. It also supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, one feature level and one API revision ahead of the AMD part. Professional users who need sustained compute throughput, large frame buffers for complex scenes, or multiple DisplayPort outputs should take the Quadro P4000. Its launch MSRP is 815 USD.

The Radeon Pro 450 is not without a reason to exist. It is a 35 W MXM module with no external power connector, designed for portable systems where space and thermals are tightly constrained. Its FP16 throughput equals its FP32 throughput, which is a rare property and useful for workloads that can exploit reduced precision. It also sits in the 49th percentile of all GPUs, slightly ahead of its direct rivals like the Quadro K2200 and Radeon RX 6600S.

The real deciding factor is the platform. If the system requires an MXM module, the Radeon Pro 450 is the only one of these two that fits. If the system has a PCIe 3.0 x16 slot and a 300 W PSU, the Quadro P4000 is the clear choice. The benchmark results do not support any other reading. The Quadro P4000 wins both head-to-head tests, and the Radeon Pro 450 records zero wins.