AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 vs NVIDIA Quadro K620M Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 is in a different performance class than the NVIDIA Quadro K620M, with the data showing a decisive victory in the only benchmark where both were tested. The WX 4100 delivers roughly triple the compute performance of the K620M in OpenCL workloads, making it the clear choice for any task that relies on general-purpose GPU compute. The K620M, meanwhile, offers a lower power draw and a more compact MXM form factor, but its performance ceiling is far lower, placing it in a different tier of professional mobile graphics.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available between these two GPUs is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is a landslide. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 scored 17,642 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro K620M managed just 5,957 points. This represents a 196.2% advantage for the AMD card, meaning the WX 4100 is nearly three times faster in raw compute throughput. This is not a marginal win; it is a generational gap that defines the entire relationship between these two products.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the WX 4100’s average benchmark score of 6,330 places it at the 37th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 M350 (average score 6,327, delta 0.1%) and the NVIDIA Quadro K620 (average score 6,282, delta 0.8%), showing it sits in a cluster of mid-range mobile and entry-level desktop parts. In contrast, the K620M’s average score of 5,957 puts it at the 34th percentile, with its closest competitor being the AMD Radeon HD 8730M (average score 5,955, delta 0%). The K620M is effectively tied with that older part, while the WX 4100 is competitive with a whole tier of stronger GPUs.

Individual benchmark results for the WX 4100 reinforce its compute-oriented design. It scores 21,018 in Geekbench Metal, 18,703 in Vulkan, and 17,642 in OpenCL, showing consistent strength across different API frameworks. Its Passmark scores tell a more varied story: 3,699 in G3D and 1,475 in GPU compute, but only 16 in DirectX 10, 24 in DirectX 11, and 22 in DirectX 12. These low DirectX scores are notable, suggesting that the WX 4100’s architecture is optimized for professional compute workloads rather than legacy gaming APIs, even though it supports DirectX 12 (12_0). The K620M has no comparable data in these tests, so no further head-to-head conclusions can be drawn.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 uses the Baffin chip with a GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.4M / mm². The NVIDIA Quadro K620M, by contrast, uses the GM108S chip with a Maxwell architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1,020 million transistors into a 77 mm² die, for a density of 13.2M / mm². The WX 4100’s newer process node allows it to fit nearly three times as many transistors into a smaller relative footprint per transistor, explaining much of its performance advantage.

The compute resources are heavily skewed toward the AMD card. The WX 4100 features 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The K620M has just 384 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This 2.67x advantage in shading units translates directly to the observed compute performance gap. Clock speeds are closer, with the WX 4100 running at 1125 MHz base and 1201 MHz boost, while the K620M runs at 1029 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost. The AMD card’s slight clock advantage, combined with its massive shader count, produces a theoretical FP32 throughput of 2.460 TFLOPS versus the K620M’s 863.2 GFLOPS. The WX 4100 also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (2.460 TFLOPS), while the K620M has no listed FP16 capability.

Memory subsystems are equally divergent. The WX 4100 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth at an effective 6 Gbps speed. The K620M uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, achieving only 16.02 GB/s of bandwidth at 2 Gbps effective. The AMD card has six times the memory bandwidth, which is critical for texture-heavy workloads and large data sets. The WX 4100’s pixel rate is 19.22 GPixel/s and texture rate is 76.86 GTexel/s, compared to the K620M’s 8.992 GPixel/s and 17.98 GTexel/s. Every metric points to the same conclusion: the WX 4100 is a substantially more powerful piece of silicon.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 is the superior GPU for any workload that stresses compute performance. Its 196.2% lead in OpenCL benchmark performance, combined with higher memory bandwidth and more than double the shading units, makes it the only rational choice for professionals who need to run GPU-accelerated applications. The WX 4100 also offers broader API support, including DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, whereas the K620M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD card’s 4 GB of GDDR5 memory versus the K620M’s 2 GB of DDR3 further widens the gap for memory-intensive tasks.

The NVIDIA Quadro K620M does have one clear advantage: power efficiency. Its 30 W TDP is significantly lower than the WX 4100’s 50 W TDP, and its MXM-A (3.0) form factor is designed for portable devices, whereas the WX 4100 is a single-slot, 168 mm long card that requires a PCIe 3.0 x8 slot. For a mobile workstation where battery life and thermals are paramount, the K620M’s lower power draw is a legitimate consideration. However, the performance penalty is severe. The K620M’s average benchmark score of 5,957 places it in the 34th percentile, roughly tied with the AMD Radeon HD 8730M and below the NVIDIA Quadro K4000. The WX 4100, at the 37th percentile, is competitive with the GeForce GTX 580M and GTX 460 SE.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 | NVIDIA Quadro K620M |

|---|---|---|

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 3,000 million | 1,020 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.4M / mm² | 13.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1125 MHz | 1029 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1201 MHz | 1124 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz / 6 Gbps effective | 1001 MHz / 2 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 16.02 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 384 |

| TMUs | 64 | 16 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 19.22 GPixel/s | 8.992 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 76.86 GTexel/s | 17.98 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.460 TFLOPS | 863.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 2.460 TFLOPS (1:1) | null |

| TDP | 50 W | 30 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | MXM Module |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-A (3.0) |

| Display Outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 is decisively faster, scoring 17,642 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the NVIDIA Quadro K620M’s 5,957, a 196.2% advantage.

Q: How much memory does each card have and what type?

A: The WX 4100 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The K620M has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 16.02 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for these GPUs?

A: The WX 4100 has a TDP of 50 W and requires a 250 W suggested PSU. The K620M has a TDP of 30 W and has no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Do these cards support modern graphics APIs?

A: The WX 4100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The K620M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the form factor difference?

A: The WX 4100 is a single-slot card measuring 168 mm in length with a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface. The K620M is an MXM Module using the MXM-A (3.0) interface, designed for portable devices.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The WX 4100 has an average benchmark score of 6,330, placing it at the 37th percentile of all GPUs. The K620M has an average score of 5,957, placing it at the 34th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 wins in every compute and memory-related category. Its 2.460 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 96.00 GB/s memory bandwidth make it suitable for GPU-accelerated rendering, scientific simulation, and machine learning inference tasks that rely on OpenCL or Vulkan. The 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer allows for larger textures and data sets than the K620M’s 2 GB DDR3. The WX 4100’s four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs also support multi-monitor professional setups, a feature the K620M lacks entirely, as its display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent."

The NVIDIA Quadro K620M wins on power efficiency and portability. Its 30 W TDP is 40% lower than the WX 4100’s 50 W, and its MXM-A form factor is specifically engineered for thin-and-light mobile workstations. For a laptop user who needs basic CAD or 3D modeling acceleration without draining the battery, the K620M is the more practical choice. However, the performance sacrifice is enormous: the K620M’s OpenCL score is less than a third of the WX 4100’s. The K620M also supports Vulkan 1.4, a newer version than the WX 4100’s Vulkan 1.3, which could matter for specific future applications, though this does not compensate for the raw compute deficit. In any scenario where performance is the priority, the WX 4100 is the only defensible option.