AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000M Comparison

AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000M

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 and NVIDIA Quadro K4000M represent two very different approaches to professional graphics, separated by over four years of architectural evolution. The WX 4100, built on AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture with a 14 nm process, delivers dramatically higher compute performance and modern API support, while the K4000M, based on NVIDIA's older Kepler architecture on 28 nm, offers a wider memory bus and higher pixel throughput per clock. The benchmark data shows a decisive victory for the AMD card in the only shared test, but the specification sheets reveal trade-offs in memory bandwidth efficiency and form factor that matter for specific workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 scores an average of 6330 across all benchmarks, while the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M averages 5986. This places the WX 4100 in the 37th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 34th percentile for the K4000M.

Q: How do the two compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 achieves 17642 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 194.7% higher than the K4000M's score of 5986. This is the only benchmark where both cards were tested head-to-head.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each card according to average score?

A: The WX 4100's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 M350 (6327, 0.1% delta), followed by the NVIDIA Quadro K620 (6282, 0.8% delta). The K4000M's closest competitor is the AMD FirePro W4100 (5987, 0% delta), with the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 (5982, 0.1% delta) close behind.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 packs 24.4 million transistors per square millimeter, far exceeding the K4000M's 12.0M / mm². This is a direct result of the WX 4100's 14 nm process versus the K4000M's 28 nm process.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 compute performance?

A: The WX 4100 delivers 2.460 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the K4000M manages 1,153.9 GFLOPS. The AMD card offers more than double the single-precision compute power.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth despite a narrower bus?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 achieves 96.00 GB/s on a 128-bit bus, while the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M reaches 89.60 GB/s on a 256-bit bus. The WX 4100's faster 6 Gbps effective memory clock compensates for its narrower interface.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 is the superior performer for compute-heavy professional workloads. Its 194.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL over the K4000M is a generational gap, driven by a 14 nm process, double the FP32 throughput, and modern GCN 4.0 architecture. The WX 4100 also supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, whereas the K4000M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175.

For users needing raw compute in CAD, rendering, or GPU-accelerated analytics, the WX 4100 is the clear choice. Its 2.460 TFLOPS FP32 and 1024 shading units provide a substantial advantage over the K4000M's 960 shading units and 1,153.9 GFLOPS. The AMD card also benefits from a much lower 50 W TDP versus the K4000M's 100 W, making it more efficient in dense workstations.

However, the K4000M is not without merit. Its 256-bit memory bus and 32 ROPs give it theoretical advantages in pure pixel fill rate per clock, though the actual pixel rate (12.02 GPixel/s) is lower than the WX 4100's 19.22 GPixel/s due to the massive clock speed difference. The K4000M's MXM Module form factor suits laptop or modular systems, while the WX 4100 is a single-slot PCIe 3.0 x8 card with four mini-DisplayPort outputs. If you require a mobile or MXM-compatible professional GPU and cannot use a desktop card, the K4000M is the only option here, but it is decisively slower in compute benchmarks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is lopsided. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 scores 17642, while the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M scores 5986, yielding a delta of 194.7% in favor of AMD. This is not a marginal win; it is a near-tripling of performance, indicating that the WX 4100 is in a completely different performance class for OpenCL compute workloads.

The WX 4100's other benchmark results reinforce this dominance. In Geekbench Metal, it scores 21018, and in Vulkan it reaches 18703. Passmark results show a G3D score of 3699 and a GPU compute score of 1475. The K4000M has no comparable data in these tests, so the OpenCL result must stand as the primary head-to-head evidence.

In terms of pixel and texture throughput, the WX 4100 again leads. Its pixel rate of 19.22 GPixel/s is 59.9% higher than the K4000M's 12.02 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 76.86 GTexel/s is 59.8% higher than 48.08 GTexel/s. These differences stem from the WX 4100's 1125 MHz base clock boosting to 1201 MHz, versus the K4000M's fixed 601 MHz clock. The AMD card's clock advantage of roughly 2x is enough to overcome the K4000M's higher texture unit count (80 vs 64) and ROP count (32 vs 16).

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge significantly across almost every specification. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, while the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M uses TSMC's 28 nm process. This leads to a stark difference in die size: the WX 4100's Baffin chip measures 123 mm² with 3,000 million transistors, while the K4000M's GK104 is 294 mm² with 3,540 million transistors. The transistor density tells the story — 24.4M / mm² for AMD versus 12.0M / mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds are massively different. The WX 4100 runs at 1125 MHz base and 1201 MHz boost, while the K4000M is locked at 601 MHz for both base and boost. Memory clocks also differ: 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for the AMD card versus 700 MHz (2.8 Gbps effective) for the NVIDIA card. Both have 4 GB of GDDR5, but the bus widths differ — 128-bit for AMD, 256-bit for NVIDIA — resulting in 96.00 GB/s for the WX 4100 and 89.60 GB/s for the K4000M.

Compute resources also differ. The WX 4100 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs; the K4000M has 960 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The AMD card's FP32 performance is 2.460 TFLOPS and it supports FP16 at 2.460 TFLOPS (1:1), while the K4000M's FP32 is 1,153.9 GFLOPS with no FP16 support listed. Power consumption is another key difference: the WX 4100 draws 50 W with a suggested 250 W PSU, whereas the K4000M draws 100 W.

Form factor and connectivity differ as well. The WX 4100 is a single-slot, 168 mm (6.6 inches) long card with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface. The K4000M is an MXM Module with an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface and "portable device dependent" display outputs. Both have no power connectors, but the WX 4100 is desktop-oriented while the K4000M targets mobile or modular systems.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 is built on GCN 4.0 (Baffin chip) from the Radeon Pro Polaris generation, released in November 2016. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M uses the Kepler architecture (GK104) from the Quadro Kepler-M generation, released in May 2012. This four-year gap explains most of the performance disparity.

The WX 4100's GCN 4.0 architecture supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, with modern features like asynchronous compute and improved geometry processing. The K4000M's Kepler architecture supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175, which is a functional but older feature set. The FP16 support on the WX 4100 (2.460 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio) is absent on the K4000M, which matters for machine learning inference and certain compute tasks.

The 14 nm process node on the WX 4100 enables higher clock speeds and better transistor density, while the 28 nm Kepler chip is limited to a 601 MHz clock. The K4000M compensates with a larger die and more TMUs and ROPs, but the clock disadvantage is insurmountable in compute benchmarks. The WX 4100's predecessor is the Radeon Pro GCN and its successor is the Radeon Pro Vega, while the K4000M sits between Quadro Fermi-M and Quadro Maxwell-M. Both cards are end-of-life, but the WX 4100's architecture is far more relevant to modern workloads.