AMD Radeon R5 M420 vs NVIDIA Quadro P1000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains a single direct comparison between these two mobile graphics solutions: Geekbench OpenCL. The results are not close. The NVIDIA Quadro P1000 scores 13,584, while the AMD Radeon R5 M420 scores 3,956. This represents a delta of -70.9% for the AMD part, meaning the Quadro P1000 is approximately 3.4 times faster in this compute workload. The margin is decisive and consistent with the underlying specifications, which show a much larger GPU on the NVIDIA side.

Looking at the broader database context, each GPU sits near similar percentile rankings despite the massive OpenCL gap. The Radeon R5 M420 lands in the 23rd percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro P1000 sits in the 20th percentile. This is curious: the P1000 is dramatically faster in raw compute, yet its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 3,163, which is actually lower than the R5 M420's single recorded score of 3,956. The reason becomes clear when examining the P1000's full benchmark suite. It includes multiple PassMark tests with very low scores: DirectX 10 at 21, DirectX 11 at 31, DirectX 12 at 19, and DirectX 9 at 79. These drag down its average substantially. The R5 M420 has only one benchmark entry, so its average equals its OpenCL score.

For the Quadro P1000, the strongest recorded results are Geekbench OpenCL at 13,584 and Geekbench Vulkan at 7,739. Its PassMark G3D score is 4,512, and its G2D score is 589. The GPU compute score via PassMark is 1,891. These numbers paint a picture of a capable compute-oriented part with modest DirectX performance in legacy tests. The R5 M420's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce 830M at 3,957 (0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M at 3,953 (0.1% delta), and the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 at 3,964 (-0.2% delta). This places the AMD part in a cluster of older mid-range mobile GPUs, all scoring within a narrow band around 3,950 to 3,980.

The Quadro P1000's nearest rivals are quite different: the Intel Arc Pro B60 at 3,182 (-0.6% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 at 3,210 (-1.5% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce 920M at 3,287 (-3.8% delta). Interestingly, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER appears in the list with an average score of 3,075 and a delta of 2.9%, though this seems anomalous given the massive performance difference between a modern flagship and a Quadro P1000. The data suggests the P1000's average is pulled down by its low PassMark DirectX scores, making it cluster with much weaker GPUs in the aggregate.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only head-to-head benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P1000 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 13,584 versus 3,956 for the AMD Radeon R5 M420, a delta of -70.9% for the AMD part.

Q: How do these GPUs compare in percentile ranking?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M420 sits in the 23rd percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 sits in the 20th percentile, despite the P1000 having a much higher OpenCL score.

Q: Why does the Quadro P1000 have a lower average benchmark score than the R5 M420?

A: The P1000 has nine recorded benchmarks, including several low PassMark DirectX scores (21, 31, 19, and 79), which bring its average down to 3,163. The R5 M420 has only one benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL at 3,956, so its average equals that value.

Q: What is the best recorded score for each GPU?

A: For the Quadro P1000, the best is Geekbench OpenCL at 13,584. For the Radeon R5 M420, the only recorded score is Geekbench OpenCL at 3,956.

Q: Which GPUs are the nearest rivals to the AMD Radeon R5 M420?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 830M (3,957, 0% delta), NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (3,953, 0.1% delta), NVIDIA Quadro K2000 (3,964, -0.2% delta), and AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 (3,977, -0.5% delta).

Q: Does the Quadro P1000 have any Vulkan benchmark results?

A: Yes, the Quadro P1000 records a Geekbench Vulkan score of 7,739. The Radeon R5 M420 has no Vulkan benchmark recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M420 has no benchmark victories in the head-to-head comparison. Its single recorded score, Geekbench OpenCL at 3,956, is far below the Quadro P1000's 13,584. The only context where the R5 M420 appears competitive is in average benchmark score, where its 3,956 exceeds the P1000's 3,163. This is a statistical artifact of the P1000 including multiple low-performing PassMark tests, not a genuine performance advantage.

The NVIDIA Quadro P1000 wins the only direct comparison, and its benchmark profile shows strength in compute-oriented workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 13,584 is the headline figure, and its Vulkan score of 7,739 indicates solid modern API performance. The PassMark G3D score of 4,512 and GPU compute score of 1,891 further support its compute focus. The low DirectX scores (21, 31, 19, 79) suggest that legacy DirectX performance is not a strength, likely due to the professional driver stack prioritizing workstation applications over gaming paths.

For use cases, the data indicates the Quadro P1000 is suited for OpenCL compute tasks, Vulkan-based workloads, and general 3D rendering as measured by PassMark G3D. The Radeon R5 M420, with its single modest OpenCL score and no other recorded tests, offers no clear winning scenario in the database. Its nearest rivals (all scoring within 0.5% of 3,956) suggest it performs at the level of older mid-range mobile GPUs from 2013-2014 era.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The AMD Radeon R5 M420 uses a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 uses a 14 nm process at Samsung. Transistor counts differ dramatically: 690 million for AMD versus 3,300 million for NVIDIA. Die size is 56 mm² versus 132 mm². Transistor density is 12.3M per mm² versus 25.0M per mm².

Clock speeds show the NVIDIA part running much higher. The R5 M420 has a base clock of 780 MHz and boost of 850 MHz, while the P1000 runs at 1,266 MHz base and 1,480 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: 1,000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) for AMD versus 1,253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Memory configuration is similar in capacity but different in type and bandwidth. Both have 4 GB, but the R5 M420 uses DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the P1000 uses GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth. The P1000 has exactly five times the memory bandwidth.

Compute resources differ substantially. The R5 M420 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The P1000 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Pixel rate is 6.800 GPixel/s versus 47.36 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 17.00 GTexel/s versus 59.20 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 544.0 GFLOPS versus 1.894 TFLOPS. The P1000 also records FP16 at 29.60 GFLOPS (1:64), while the R5 M420 has no FP16 data.

The P1000 has a TDP of 47 W, a single-slot form factor, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 200 W. The R5 M420 is listed as IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no TDP or power connector data. Bus interface differs: PCIe 3.0 x8 for AMD versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are portable device dependent for AMD, while the P1000 offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. Dimensions are only recorded for the P1000: 150 mm length and 69 mm height.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R5 M420 is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Jet chip, part of the Gem System generation (R5 M400 series). The NVIDIA Quadro P1000 uses the Pascal architecture with the GP107 chip, part of the Quadro Pascal generation (Px000 series). Both are end-of-life products, but their release dates differ: May 2016 for AMD and February 2017 for NVIDIA.

The R5 M420's predecessor is Solar System, and its successor is Polaris Mobile. The P1000's predecessor is Quadro Maxwell, and its successor is Quadro Volta. These lineage details indicate the AMD part belongs to a mobile integrated GPU family, while the P1000 belongs to a professional workstation line.

DirectX support differs: the R5 M420 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the P1000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6. Vulkan versions differ: 1.2.170 for AMD versus 1.4 for NVIDIA. The newer Vulkan version on the P1000 aligns with its later release date and more modern architecture.

Manufacturing differences are significant. The 28 nm TSMC process for AMD is older and less dense than the 14 nm Samsung process for NVIDIA. The transistor density nearly doubles (12.3M versus 25.0M per mm²), and the P1000 uses nearly five times as many transistors. The larger die (132 mm² versus 56 mm²) combined with higher density explains the P1000's superior compute throughput.

Neither GPU has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, which is consistent with their respective eras. The P1000's FP16 capability at 1:64 ratio indicates a compute path that strongly favors FP32, typical of Pascal generation professional cards. The R5 M420 has no FP16 data recorded, suggesting it lacks a dedicated FP16 path.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous about raw performance: the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 is in a different class. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 13,584 versus 3,956 represents a 70.9% advantage for NVIDIA. Every compute resource points the same direction: 640 versus 320 shading units, 80.19 GB/s versus 16.00 GB/s memory bandwidth, 1.894 TFLOPS versus 544.0 GFLOPS FP32.

The Radeon R5 M420 is an integrated GPU from 2016, built on a 28 nm process with DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus. Its performance cluster, based on nearest rivals, places it alongside NVIDIA GeForce 830M and GT 745M class parts. The Quadro P1000, despite being a professional card, shows strong OpenCL and Vulkan results, with its average score dragged down by legacy DirectX tests that are less relevant to workstation use.

For users choosing between these two, the decision hinges on workload. The P1000 is the clear choice for OpenCL compute, Vulkan applications, and any task requiring memory bandwidth. The R5 M420's only recorded advantage is its higher average benchmark score, which is a data artifact rather than a real performance feature. The P1000's 47 W TDP and single-slot design make it a plausible addition to compact workstations, while the R5 M420's IGP nature means it is integrated into a portable device with no upgrade path.

The percentile rankings tell a nuanced story: both sit near the bottom of the database (23rd and 20th percentiles), but this reflects the P1000's inclusion of older DirectX tests. In modern compute benchmarks, the P1000 is vastly superior. The R5 M420 should be considered only for legacy systems where it is already embedded and light graphical duties are expected. The Quadro P1000, despite being end-of-life, remains a viable option for compute-oriented tasks within its generation's capabilities.