AMD Radeon R5 Graphics vs NVIDIA Quadro K2100M Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M and AMD Radeon R5 Graphics represent two very different philosophies for mobile computing: a dedicated professional GPU versus an integrated graphics processor. The data shows a split decision across the two shared benchmark tests, with each card claiming a decisive victory in one discipline. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics scores 5183, which is 11.5% higher than the Quadro’s 4587. However, the tables turn dramatically in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M scores 4343, a massive 68.2% lead over the Radeon’s 2582. This stark difference suggests that API selection heavily influences which GPU comes out on top.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs engage in a direct contest across only two benchmarks, and the results are a study in contrasts. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics emerges as the clear winner with a score of 5183, outperforming the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M’s 4587 by an 11.5% margin. This is a substantial lead, indicating that the Radeon’s architecture is better optimized for the general-purpose compute workloads that OpenCL typically represents. The Radeon’s victory is not a narrow one; it is a solid, double-digit advantage that would be noticeable in any application relying on this API.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells an entirely different story. Here, the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M delivers a score of 4343, while the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics trails significantly at 2582. The delta of 68.2% in favor of NVIDIA is a landslide. This result suggests that the Quadro’s Kepler architecture has a substantial edge in handling the low-level, graphics-oriented tasks that Vulkan is designed for. The gap is so wide that it fundamentally changes the performance profile of these two products, making the Quadro the obvious choice for any workload that leverages Vulkan.

Looking at the aggregate data, the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M holds a higher average benchmark score of 4151 across all its tests, compared to the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics’ 3883. This places the Quadro at the 25th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon sits slightly lower at the 23rd percentile. The Quadro’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R5 M330, has an average score of 4170, which is a negligible 0.4% difference. Meanwhile, the Radeon R5 Graphics’ closest competitor, the NVIDIA Quadro 2000, scores 3898, a similarly tiny 0.4% gap. These figures indicate that while the two cards are competitive in their respective performance tiers, the Quadro K2100M generally holds a slight edge in overall compute capability.

The Verdict

From the benchmark data, the choice between these two GPUs is entirely dependent on the application’s API. For users running OpenCL-based workloads, the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is the superior performer. Its 11.5% lead over the Quadro in that specific test is a clear indicator of its strength in general-purpose compute. However, for any task that utilizes Vulkan, the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M is the definitive winner, with a 68.2% performance advantage that is impossible to ignore.

The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M is the safer pick for a broader range of tasks, primarily because its Vulkan score is so strong and its OpenCL score is still respectable. The Radeon’s Vulkan performance, on the other hand, is a significant weakness that could hinder its usability in modern graphics applications. Data suggests that the Quadro’s higher average score of 4151 versus the Radeon’s 3883 reinforces this perspective, making it the more balanced of the two. The Radeon R5 Graphics is a specialist, excelling in one area but falling far behind in another. The Quadro K2100M, with its single win and higher overall average, is the more versatile choice for a mixed workload environment.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is profound. The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M is built on the Kepler architecture, using the GK106S chip, while the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is based on GCN 2.0, using the Spectre SL chip. This fundamental difference explains the divergent benchmark results. Kepler was designed with a strong focus on graphics rendering efficiency, which likely contributes to its dominant Vulkan performance. Conversely, GCN 2.0 was AMD’s attempt at a unified shader architecture that could handle compute tasks more effectively, explaining its OpenCL advantage.

Both GPUs are manufactured on a 28 nm process, but by different foundries; NVIDIA uses TSMC, while AMD uses GlobalFoundries. The transistor counts are similar, with the Quadro featuring 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, and the Radeon packing 2,410 million transistors on a larger 245 mm² die. This results in a higher transistor density for the NVIDIA chip at 11.5M / mm², compared to AMD’s 9.8M / mm². The Radeon R5 Graphics is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) within a Kaveri APU, while the Quadro is a discrete mobile module. This integration means the Radeon shares the die with CPU cores, whereas the Quadro is a standalone graphics processor. The Radeon’s memory is also fundamentally different, using "System Shared" memory with "System Dependent" bandwidth, a design choice that contrasts sharply with the Quadro’s dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet reveals a clear hierarchy in raw hardware resources. The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M boasts 576 shading units, 48 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster operations pipelines (ROPs). In contrast, the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is equipped with only 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. This massive disparity in core counts is reflected in the fill rates; the Quadro achieves 8.004 GPixel/s and 32.02 GTexel/s, while the Radeon manages only 3.032 GPixel/s and 12.13 GTexel/s. The compute performance follows the same trend, with the Quadro delivering 768.4 GFLOPS of FP32 performance versus the Radeon’s 388.1 GFLOPS.

Clock speeds are another point of divergence. The Quadro operates at a fixed 667 MHz for both base and boost, with memory running at 752 MHz (3 Gbps effective). The Radeon’s clock speeds are not specified in the data, a notable omission. Power consumption also separates the two, with the Quadro having a 55 W TDP and an MXM Module slot width, while the Radeon is a 15 W IGP. The bus interfaces reflect their designs: the Quadro uses MXM-A (3.0), whereas the Radeon is integrated into the system’s IGP bus. DirectX support also differs, with the Quadro supporting DirectX 12 (11_0) and the Radeon supporting DirectX 12 (12_0), indicating a more modern feature set for the AMD part.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M has a higher average benchmark score of 4151, compared to the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics’ 3883.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics wins the OpenCL test with a score of 5183, which is 11.5% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M’s score of 4587.

Q: What is the most significant performance difference between the two?

A: The most significant difference is in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M scores 4343, a 68.2% advantage over the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics’ 2582.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M has 576 shading units, while the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics has 256 shading units.

Q: What is the TDP of each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M has a TDP of 55 W, and the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: How does the memory configuration differ?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M uses 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus, while the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics uses System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics wins decisively in the OpenCL compute domain. Its score of 5183 is a clear 11.5% improvement over the Quadro’s 4587, making it the superior choice for applications that rely on this API for general-purpose GPU computing. This could include tasks like video encoding, scientific simulations, or other compute-heavy workloads that are not strictly graphics-oriented.

The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M wins overwhelmingly in Vulkan graphics performance. Its 68.2% lead in the Vulkan benchmark is its defining characteristic. This makes it the preferred option for modern games and applications that use the Vulkan API, where its architecture clearly excels. Furthermore, its higher average score of 4151 and superior raw specifications, such as higher pixel rate (8.004 GPixel/s vs 3.032 GPixel/s) and texture rate (32.02 GTexel/s vs 12.13 GTexel/s), suggest it is the more powerful GPU overall, capable of handling more demanding graphics tasks when the software is compatible. The Quadro’s dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory also provides a significant advantage over the Radeon’s shared memory setup, which is dependent on system resources. The data strongly suggests that for any user prioritizing graphics performance and API versatility, the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M is the superior hardware, while the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is a specialist compute part.