AMD Radeon R5 M420 vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000D Comparison

The AMD Radeon R5 M420 and NVIDIA Quadro 2000D are both end-of-life products that land in the 23rd percentile of all GPUs, according to the benchmark database. Their Geekbench OpenCL scores are remarkably close, with the R5 M420 posting 3,956 and the Quadro 2000D posting 3,930, a difference of just 0.7%. Despite this near-parity in compute performance, these two cards are engineered for entirely different environments—one is a mobile integrated part from the GCN 1.0 era, and the other is a desktop professional workstation card built on Fermi. The data shows they share a performance tier but diverge sharply in memory architecture, power requirements, and physical design.

Architecture Differences

The R5 M420 is built on AMD’s GCN 1.0 architecture using a chip codenamed Jet, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. That process packs 690 million transistors into a 56 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the Quadro 2000D uses NVIDIA’s Fermi architecture with a GF106 chip, also made by TSMC but on an older 40 nm node. The Fermi chip contains 1,170 million transistors spread across a much larger 238 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 4.9 million per square millimeter. The R5 M420’s newer process node allows it to achieve higher transistor density, while the Quadro 2000D compensates with a physically larger and more complex chip.

Core configuration tells a mixed story. The R5 M420 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 render output units (ROPs). The Quadro 2000D has fewer shading units at 192, but more TMUs (32) and double the ROPs (16). This means the AMD part relies on a wider array of shader cores, while the NVIDIA part focuses on texture and pixel throughput. Clock speeds are not directly comparable—the R5 M420 has a base clock of 780 MHz and boost up to 850 MHz, while the Quadro 2000D’s base and boost clocks are not listed in the data. The R5 M420’s memory runs at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), whereas the Quadro 2000D’s memory runs at 650 MHz (2.6 Gbps effective).

Feature support also differs. The R5 M420 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Quadro 2000D lists DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but no Vulkan support. This gives the AMD part a clear API advantage for modern compute workloads. The Quadro 2000D is a single-slot desktop card with two DVI outputs and no power connectors, drawing a TDP of 62 W with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The R5 M420 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with display outputs described as “Portable Device Dependent,” indicating it is soldered onto a laptop motherboard.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher benchmark score in OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M420 scores 3,956 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 0.7% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D’s score of 3,930. The head-to-head benchmark result marks the AMD part as the winner in this single test.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The R5 M420 is nearly tied with the NVIDIA GeForce 830M (3,957, 0% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (3,953, 0.1% delta). The Quadro 2000D is closest to the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D (3,919, 0.3% delta) and trails the GeForce GT 745M by 0.6%. Both cards perform within a 1% band of several other mid-range parts from their respective eras.

Q: What are the key memory differences between the two?

A: The R5 M420 has 4 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro 2000D has 1 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 41.60 GB/s. The Quadro 2000D has 2.6 times the memory bandwidth despite having less total capacity.

Q: Does the R5 M420 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the R5 M420 supports Vulkan version 1.2.170. The Quadro 2000D does not list any Vulkan support, which limits its compatibility with modern graphics APIs that rely on Vulkan.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The R5 M420 has a pixel rate of 6.800 GPixel/s, which is 36% higher than the Quadro 2000D’s 5.000 GPixel/s. This suggests the AMD part may handle fill-rate-bound tasks better, despite the NVIDIA card having more ROPs.

Q: What is the physical form factor of each card?

A: The R5 M420 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP), meaning it is built into a mobile chipset with no separate slot width. The Quadro 2000D is a single-slot desktop card measuring 178 mm in length and 111 mm in height, with two DVI display outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M420 wins the only benchmark recorded in the head-to-head data, taking the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 3,956 versus 3,930. This 0.7% advantage is narrow, but it gives the R5 M420 the overall wins count of 1 against 0 for the Quadro 2000D. In practical terms, the R5 M420’s higher shading unit count (320 vs 192) and higher boost clock (850 MHz) likely contribute to its slight edge in compute-heavy OpenCL workloads. It also offers 4 GB of memory, which is four times the Quadro 2000D’s 1 GB, making it the better choice for applications that need larger framebuffers or data sets that fit in VRAM.

The Quadro 2000D, on the other hand, wins on memory bandwidth with 41.60 GB/s versus 16.00 GB/s—a 160% advantage. This is a decisive factor for tasks that are bandwidth-limited, such as high-resolution texture streaming or certain scientific compute kernels. It also has more TMUs (32 vs 20) and more ROPs (16 vs 8), which should improve texture filtering and pixel output efficiency. The Quadro 2000D’s higher texture rate of 20.00 GTexel/s versus 17.00 GTexel/s confirms its advantage in texture-heavy scenes. For professional workstation use, the Quadro 2000D’s 2x DVI outputs and single-slot form factor with no power connectors make it a drop-in card for legacy multi-monitor setups, while the R5 M420 is locked into a portable device’s internal display path.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: pick the AMD Radeon R5 M420 if you need raw OpenCL compute performance in a mobile form factor with modern API support (Vulkan 1.2.170, DirectX 12 11_1) and a larger 4 GB memory pool. It is the faster card in the only recorded benchmark, and its 28 nm process gives it a density advantage that hints at better efficiency per die area. The Quadro 2000D is the choice for legacy desktop workstations where memory bandwidth matters more than shader count, and where the 2x DVI outputs and single-slot design fit into existing professional setups. Its 41.60 GB/s bandwidth is more than double the R5 M420’s, and its higher texture rate and ROP count make it suited for fill-rate-bound tasks. However, the Quadro 2000D lacks Vulkan support and has only 1 GB of GDDR5, which is limiting for modern workloads. The R5 M420’s 0.7% benchmark lead is marginal, but its feature set and memory capacity make it the more future-proof part for general compute. Launch MSRP for the Quadro 2000D was 599 USD.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon R5 M420 scores 3,956, and the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D scores 3,930. The R5 M420 wins by a delta of 0.7%. This is a small margin, but it is consistent with the R5 M420’s positioning against its nearest rivals—it is within 0.1% of the GeForce GT 745M (3,953) and within 0.2% of the Quadro K2000 (3,964). The Quadro 2000D, by comparison, is slightly behind its own nearest rival, the Quadro K2000D (3,919), by 0.3%. In the broader context, both cards sit at the 23rd percentile of all GPUs, meaning they are outclassed by the vast majority of modern hardware. The R5 M420’s win is notable because it achieves this with a 64-bit memory bus and DDR3, whereas the Quadro 2000D has a 128-bit bus and GDDR5. This suggests the R5 M420’s shader core efficiency compensates for its bandwidth deficit. The Quadro 2000D’s best counterargument is its 41.60 GB/s bandwidth, which is 2.6 times higher than the R5 M420’s 16.00 GB/s, but the benchmark data shows this does not translate into a higher OpenCL score.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every core specification except for their OpenGL version (both 4.6) and production status (both end-of-life). The R5 M420 uses a 28 nm process with 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, while the Quadro 2000D uses 40 nm with 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die. Transistor density favors the AMD part at 12.3M / mm² versus 4.9M / mm². Shading units are 320 on the R5 M420 versus 192 on the Quadro 2000D. TMUs favor the NVIDIA part: 32 versus 20. ROPs also favor NVIDIA: 16 versus 8. Clock speeds: the R5 M420 has a base of 780 MHz and boost of 850 MHz; the Quadro 2000D has no listed base or boost clocks, only a memory clock of 650 MHz (2.6 Gbps effective) versus the R5 M420’s 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective). Memory configuration: the R5 M420 has 4 GB DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth; the Quadro 2000D has 1024 MB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 41.60 GB/s bandwidth. Pixel rate is 6.800 GPixel/s on the R5 M420 versus 5.000 GPixel/s on the Quadro 2000D. Texture rate is 17.00 GTexel/s on the R5 M420 versus 20.00 GTexel/s on the Quadro 2000D. FP32 performance is 544.0 GFLOPS on the R5 M420 versus 480.0 GFLOPS on the Quadro 2000D. TDP is null on the R5 M420 (IGP) versus 62 W on the Quadro 2000D. Slot width: IGP versus single-slot. Power connectors: none on either, but the Quadro 2000D has a suggested PSU of 250 W. Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x8 on the R5 M420 versus PCIe 2.0 x16 on the Quadro 2000D. Display outputs: portable device dependent versus 2x DVI. API support: DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170 on the R5 M420 versus DirectX 12 (11_0) and no Vulkan on the Quadro 2000D. Release dates: May 2016 for the R5 M420 versus October 2011 for the Quadro 2000D.