AMD Radeon Pro 560 vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear picture: the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M dominates the AMD Radeon Pro 560 in the two shared test categories. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro M4000M scores 19,989 against the Radeon Pro 560's 15,504, a 28.9% advantage. The Vulkan test shows a similar gap, with the NVIDIA part scoring 20,971 versus 16,232 for the AMD part, a 29.2% lead. These are substantial margins, indicating the Quadro M4000M delivers roughly 29% higher raw compute throughput in both APIs tested.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this hierarchy. The Quadro M4000M averages 20,480 across its recorded tests, while the Radeon Pro 560 averages 17,551. This places the NVIDIA part in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD part sits in the 61st percentile. The delta between their average scores is 2,929 points, a gap that translates into noticeably different performance tiers.

Looking at the nearest rivals for context, the Quadro M4000M's average score of 20,480 puts it within 0.3% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (20,534) and 0.4% of the Intel Arc B570 (20,556). It is also 0.5% behind the Intel Arc A750 (20,582) and 0.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 M390X (20,662). The Radeon Pro 560's average of 17,551 places it 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon 780M (17,588), 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 460 (17,509), 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla K40c (17,468), and 0.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (17,639). These proximity figures indicate both cards are competitive with their immediate peers, but the Quadro M4000M operates in a higher performance band overall.

The head-to-head data records two wins for the Quadro M4000M and zero for the Radeon Pro 560. Neither test shows a close finish. The OpenCL result favors NVIDIA by a 28.9% margin, and the Vulkan result favors NVIDIA by a 29.2% margin. This consistency across different API workloads suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro M4000M wins decisively in every benchmark category where both cards were tested. Its OpenCL score of 19,989 versus 15,504 demonstrates a clear advantage in general-purpose compute, which is relevant for tasks like rendering, physics simulations, and data processing. The Vulkan result of 20,971 versus 16,232 indicates superiority in graphics workloads that leverage this modern API, including many current game engines and professional visualization applications.

The Radeon Pro 560 does not have a single recorded win against the Quadro M4000M in the shared test suite. However, the AMD card does have one unique benchmark result not available for the NVIDIA part: a Geekbench Metal score of 20,918. This is significant because Metal is Apple's graphics API, and the Radeon Pro 560 is specifically designed for Mac systems. The Metal score of 20,918 is actually higher than the Radeon Pro 560's OpenCL score of 15,504 by 34.9% and its Vulkan score of 16,232 by 28.9%. This suggests the card is optimized for Apple's ecosystem, where Metal is the primary graphics interface.

For users working within macOS environments, the Radeon Pro 560's Metal performance is its strongest attribute. The database shows no comparable Metal result for the Quadro M4000M, so direct comparison in that API is not possible. However, the recorded data indicates that in cross-platform APIs like OpenCL and Vulkan, the Quadro M4000M holds a commanding lead. The use-case split is therefore: NVIDIA wins on raw compute and cross-platform graphics, while AMD offers a specialized advantage in Apple's Metal ecosystem, though this cannot be quantified relative to the NVIDIA part.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M has a higher average benchmark score of 20,480, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro 560's 17,551.

Q: How large is the performance gap in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M scores 19,989 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 28.9% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 560's 15,504.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro 560 win in any benchmark against the Quadro M4000M?

A: No. In the two shared tests (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the Quadro M4000M wins both. The Radeon Pro 560 has a separate Metal score of 20,918, but no direct comparison exists for that test.

Q: What are the percentile rankings of each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M ranks in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon Pro 560 ranks in the 61st percentile.

Q: Which GPU is closer to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile in performance?

A: The Quadro M4000M's average score of 20,480 is within 0.3% of the RTX 3070 Mobile's 20,534. The Radeon Pro 560's average score of 17,551 is 14.5% lower than that rival.

Q: What is the Vulkan performance difference?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M scores 20,971 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the AMD Radeon Pro 560 scores 16,232, giving NVIDIA a 29.2% advantage.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across virtually every core specification. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M features 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The AMD Radeon Pro 560 has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. This ROP disparity is particularly notable, as it affects pixel fill rate performance. The Quadro M4000M achieves a pixel rate of 64.83 GPixel/s, while the Radeon Pro 560 manages only 14.51 GPixel/s, a 4.5x difference. Texture rates also favor NVIDIA: 81.04 GTexel/s versus 58.05 GTexel/s.

Memory configurations differ significantly. Both cards have 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, but the bus widths diverge. The Quadro M4000M uses a 256-bit interface delivering 160.4 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Radeon Pro 560 uses a 128-bit interface providing 81.28 GB/s. This means the NVIDIA part has nearly double the memory bandwidth. Effective memory clocks are 5 Gbps for the Quadro M4000M and 5.1 Gbps for the Radeon Pro 560, a negligible difference that does not compensate for the bus width gap.

The clock speeds also differ. The Quadro M4000M has a base clock of 975 MHz and a boost clock of 1013 MHz. The Radeon Pro 560 has no recorded base or boost clock in the database, so only its memory clock of 1270 MHz is available for comparison. Floating-point performance reflects these core differences: the Quadro M4000M delivers 2.593 TFLOPS FP32, while the Radeon Pro 560 delivers 1.858 TFLOPS. The AMD card also lists FP16 performance of 1.858 TFLOPS (1:1), a figure not recorded for the NVIDIA part.

Power and form factor specifications also separate the two. The Quadro M4000M has a 100 W TDP and uses an MXM Module slot width. The Radeon Pro 560 has a 75 W TDP and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no slot width specification. Both use PCIe 3.0, but the NVIDIA card uses x16 lanes while the AMD card uses x8 lanes. Neither card requires additional power connectors, and both have portable-device-dependent display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these GPUs is generational and fundamental. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M is built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM204 chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.1 million transistors per square millimeter. This is a larger, older-node design with lower density.

The AMD Radeon Pro 560 uses the GCN 4.0 architecture with the Polaris 21 chip, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 3,000 million transistors into a much smaller 123 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 24.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The AMD chip is therefore more efficient in terms of transistor packing, despite having fewer total transistors.

The generation labels reflect their positioning: the Quadro M4000M belongs to the Quadro Maxwell-M (Mx000M) series, released in August 2015, while the Radeon Pro 560 belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (500 Series), released in April 2017. The NVIDIA part's predecessor is the Quadro Kepler-M, and its successor is the Quadro Pascal-M. The AMD part has no recorded predecessor or successor in the database.

API support shows minor differences. The Quadro M4000M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon Pro 560 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The DirectX feature level difference (12_1 versus 12_0) and Vulkan version difference (1.4 versus 1.3) are small but present. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, as both predate those hardware features. The AMD card does support FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, a capability not listed for the NVIDIA part, which may benefit certain workload types.

The manufacturing foundries also differ, with TSMC producing the NVIDIA chip and GlobalFoundries producing the AMD chip. This, combined with the process node difference (28 nm versus 14 nm), explains the substantial die size and density disparities. The newer 14 nm process allows AMD to achieve higher transistor density with fewer resources, though the larger Maxwell chip still delivers superior absolute performance in the recorded benchmarks.