AMD Radeon R5 M420 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2100M Comparison

NVIDIA Quadro K2100M and AMD Radeon R5 M420 are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions, but they target different segments of the laptop market. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy between them, with the Quadro K2100M holding a decisive edge in the only shared benchmark, while the Radeon R5 M420 counters with a larger memory pool. This analysis breaks down the measurable differences, drawing exclusively from the provided benchmark and specification data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is a substantial victory for the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M. It scores 4587 points, while the AMD Radeon R5 M420 manages 3956 points. This represents a 16% delta in favor of the NVIDIA part. This is not a marginal win; it is a significant gap that places the two GPUs in different performance tiers for compute workloads.

To contextualize the Quadro K2100M's score, its average benchmark score of 4151 places it in the 25th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are incredibly close, with the AMD Radeon R5 M330 (avg score 4170) trailing by just 0.4%, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (avg score 4193) ahead by 1%. This clustering suggests the K2100M sits at a very specific performance inflection point, where a single driver update or thermal variance could shift its standing among peers.

The Radeon R5 M420, with an average score of 3956, sits in the 23rd percentile. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce 830M, which scores 3957 — a delta of 0%. This means the R5 M420 is essentially performance-identical to the 830M. It also trades blows with the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (3953, +0.1% for the R5) and the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 (3964, -0.2% for the R5). The takeaway is that the R5 M420 is locked in a tight battle with a group of older, low-tier parts, whereas the K2100M competes in a slightly higher echelon.

The 16% OpenCL delta is consistent with the underlying architecture differences. The K2100M delivers 768.4 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the R5 M420 provides 544.0 GFLOPS. This 41% theoretical compute advantage for NVIDIA is diluted in real-world OpenCL performance but still manifests as a clear lead. The result implies that the K2100M is the more capable accelerator for general-purpose GPU tasks, a critical consideration for professional applications that leverage OpenCL.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score across all tests?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M, with an average benchmark score of 4151, exceeds the AMD Radeon R5 M420's average of 3956. This places the K2100M in the 25th percentile, while the R5 M420 sits in the 23rd percentile.

Q: How much faster is the Quadro K2100M in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The K2100M scores 4587, which is 16% higher than the R5 M420's 3956. This is the only head-to-head benchmark where both GPUs have a recorded score.

Q: Does the Radeon R5 M420 have any advantage in memory specifications?

A: Yes, the R5 M420 has double the memory capacity, featuring 4 GB of DDR3, compared to the 2 GB of GDDR5 on the K2100M. However, the K2100M's memory bandwidth is significantly higher at 48.13 GB/s, versus 16.00 GB/s for the R5 M420.

Q: What does the percentile ranking indicate about these GPUs?

A: The K2100M at the 25th percentile and the R5 M420 at the 23rd percentile are both in the lower quartile of all GPUs. This indicates that neither is a high-performance part by modern standards, but the K2100M is measurably closer to the median performer.

Q: Which rival GPU is the Radeon R5 M420 most similar to in performance?

A: The data shows the R5 M420 is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce 830M, which has an average score of 3957 — a 0% delta. It is also within 0.5% of the GeForce GT 745M and Quadro K2000.

Q: Is the Quadro K2100M competitive with any mainstream gaming GPUs?

A: According to the nearest rival data, the K2100M's average score of 4151 is only 1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (avg score 4193). This places it in the same performance ballpark as that older entry-level gaming card.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the performance data, the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M is the superior GPU. It wins the only direct benchmark comparison by a 16% margin and holds a higher average benchmark score (4151 vs 3956) and percentile ranking (25th vs 23rd). For any user prioritizing compute performance, OpenCL acceleration, or raw graphics throughput, the K2100M is the clear choice.

The AMD Radeon R5 M420, however, is not without a rationale. Its 4 GB memory capacity is double that of the K2100M. This could be advantageous in specific scenarios where memory capacity is the bottleneck, such as holding larger textures in certain games or running multiple compute tasks that require more memory footprint. The data does not show a performance win for the R5 M420 in any benchmark, but the capacity advantage is a factual specification difference.

The decision hinges on the user's primary requirement. If the workload demands maximum speed and bandwidth, the K2100M is the only logical pick. If the workload is constrained by memory capacity rather than throughput, the R5 M420 offers a larger frame buffer, albeit with a 64-bit memory bus that limits its bandwidth to 16.00 GB/s. The K2100M's 128-bit bus and GDDR5 memory provide 48.13 GB/s, which is a 201% bandwidth advantage.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The most stark contrast is in memory: the Quadro K2100M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 48.13 GB/s, while the Radeon R5 M420 uses 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, delivering only 16.00 GB/s. This is a fundamental architectural split that explains the performance gap.

Clock speeds also differ. The R5 M420 has a higher base clock at 780 MHz and a boost clock of 850 MHz, compared to the K2100M's static 667 MHz (base and boost are identical). Despite the lower clock, the K2100M achieves higher throughput due to its larger core configuration. The NVIDIA part has 576 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the AMD part has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This translates to pixel rates of 8.004 GPixel/s for the K2100M versus 6.800 GPixel/s for the R5 M420, and texture rates of 32.02 GTexel/s versus 17.00 GTexel/s.

Power and form factor also diverge. The K2100M is specified at a 55 W TDP and uses an MXM Module slot (MXM-A 3.0), while the R5 M420 has no TDP listed and is designated as an IGP (Integrated Graphics Processor) with a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface. The transistor count is another major differentiator: the K2100M packs 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, while the R5 M420 has just 690 million on a 56 mm² die.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is a classic NVIDIA versus AMD design philosophy contrast. The Quadro K2100M is built on the Kepler architecture, using the GK106S chip. The Radeon R5 M420 is built on GCN 1.0, using the "Jet" chip. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process by TSMC, but the transistor density differs slightly: the K2100M achieves 11.5M transistors per mm², while the R5 M420 achieves 12.3M per mm². This indicates the AMD chip is more densely packed, but the NVIDIA chip is physically much larger.

The API support is nearly identical, with both supporting DirectX 12 (11_0 for NVIDIA, 11_1 for AMD), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan (1.2.175 for NVIDIA, 1.2.170 for AMD). The slight differences in DirectX and Vulkan versions are negligible in practice. The generational context is important: the K2100M is from the Quadro Kepler-M generation, released in July 2013, and succeeded the Quadro Fermi-M. The R5 M420 is from the Gem System (R5 M400) generation, released in May 2016, and succeeded the Solar System. The K2100M's successor is Quadro Maxwell-M, while the R5 M420's successor is Polaris Mobile.

The K2100M's larger die and higher transistor count suggest a more complex compute pipeline, which is consistent with its higher FP32 throughput of 768.4 GFLOPS versus 544.0 GFLOPS for the R5 M420. The Kepler architecture on the K2100M appears designed for professional compute workloads, while the GCN 1.0 on the R5 M420 is a more power-efficient, budget-oriented design.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M wins decisively in raw compute and rendering performance. It leads the Radeon R5 M420 in every measured throughput metric: pixel rate (8.004 vs 6.800 GPixel/s), texture rate (32.02 vs 17.00 GTexel/s), FP32 compute (768.4 vs 544.0 GFLOPS), and memory bandwidth (48.13 vs 16.00 GB/s). The 16% OpenCL benchmark victory confirms this in a practical test. The K2100M is the winner for any task that relies on GPU acceleration, such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or scientific compute.

The AMD Radeon R5 M420's only distinct advantage is memory capacity. With 4 GB, it offers twice the frame buffer of the K2100M. This could be a deciding factor in scenarios where a workload requires more data to be resident in VRAM, such as running a modern game at high texture quality on a low-resolution display or handling larger compute datasets that fit within 4 GB but exceed 2 GB. However, this advantage is severely mitigated by the R5 M420's 64-bit memory bus and DDR3 memory, which cap bandwidth at 16.00 GB/s. The data does not show any benchmark where the R5 M420 wins, so this capacity advantage remains theoretical rather than demonstrated.

In terms of power efficiency, the R5 M420 has no TDP listed, suggesting it may consume less power than the K2100M's 55 W TDP, but this cannot be confirmed from the data. The K2100M's MXM form factor indicates it is a replaceable module, while the R5 M420's IGP designation suggests it is soldered to the motherboard. The choice for a user comes down to this: the K2100M is the performance pick, while the R5 M420 is the capacity pick, with the caveat that its slower memory may negate that advantage in most real workloads.