AMD Radeon R5 M430 vs NVIDIA Quadro P400 Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data reveals a fascinating split: each GPU wins exactly one of the two available tests, yet the margins are wildly asymmetric. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon R5 M430 delivers 5152 points against the NVIDIA Quadro P400's 4249, a commanding 21.3% advantage. That is not a marginal lead; it is a decisive victory that places the R5 M430 clearly ahead in compute-oriented workloads. The Quadro P400, however, strikes back in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 5119 versus 4884, a smaller but still meaningful 4.6% edge.

What makes this interesting is the direction of the wins. The R5 M430, an integrated part from AMD's GCN 1.0 era, dominates the older OpenCL API test by a wide margin. The Quadro P400, a discrete workstation card built on NVIDIA's Pascal architecture, takes the newer Vulkan test but with a far narrower margin. This suggests the two designs have fundamentally different optimization priorities. The R5 M430's OpenCL dominance could reflect either raw compute efficiency in that API or simply better driver optimization for legacy workloads. The Quadro P400's Vulkan win, while smaller, hints at better modern API support and possibly more headroom in newer rendering paths.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the R5 M430 sits at 5018, while the Quadro P400 trails at 4684. That 7.1% gap in aggregate performance aligns with the OpenCL result being the heavier-weighted test. The percentile rankings tell a similar story: the R5 M430 lands at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro P400 sits at the 27th. Neither card is a performance powerhouse, but the data consistently places the AMD part slightly ahead in overall compute output.

The nearest rivals for each card reinforce this positioning. The R5 M430's closest competitor is the AMD FirePro W4170M at 5034, just 0.3% behind, followed by the AMD Radeon R7 M340 at 5063 (0.9% ahead) and the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 at 4979 (0.8% behind). The Quadro P400's rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB and AMD Radeon R5 M320, both at 4657 (0.6% behind), plus the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX at 4727 (0.9% ahead) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M at 4628 (1.2% behind). Notably, the Quadro P400's rival cluster is tighter—all within 1.2%—whereas the R5 M430's rivals span a slightly wider 0.9% range. This indicates the Quadro P400 sits in a more crowded performance band, while the R5 M430 has a marginally more distinct position.

# Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two GPUs is substantial and explains much of the benchmark behavior. The R5 M430 uses AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture on the Jet chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The Quadro P400 employs NVIDIA's Pascal architecture on the GP107 chip, built on a 14 nm process at Samsung. That process difference alone—28 nm versus 14 nm—represents a full generation of manufacturing advancement, allowing the Pascal part to pack far more transistors into a similar die area.

The numbers are striking. The R5 M430 contains 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The Quadro P400 crams 3,300 million transistors into 132 mm², achieving 25.0 million per square millimeter—more than double the density. This is not just a technical curiosity; it directly impacts what each chip can do. The Pascal chip has nearly five times the transistor budget, which NVIDIA uses for architectural features rather than sheer shader count.

Speaking of shader counts, the R5 M430 actually has more shading units: 320 versus the Quadro P400's 256. It also has more texture mapping units (20 vs 16). However, the Quadro P400 doubles the R5 M430's render output units (16 vs 8). This configuration suggests the NVIDIA part is better balanced for pixel throughput, while the AMD chip leans toward raw ALU work. The pixel rate confirms this: the Quadro P400 hits 20.03 GPixel/s versus 6.840 GPixel/s for the R5 M430. Texture rates are closer—20.03 GTexel/s versus 17.10 GTexel/s—but the NVIDIA card still leads.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The R5 M430 uses 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro P400 uses 2 GB of GDDR5, also on a 64-bit bus, but achieves 32.06 GB/s—exactly double the bandwidth. The AMD card offers more capacity but at half the speed, which could matter for large datasets that fit in VRAM versus workloads that are bandwidth-bound. Clock speeds also favor NVIDIA: the Quadro P400 runs at 1228 MHz base and 1252 MHz boost, while the R5 M430 operates at 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost. Memory clocks are nearly identical in raw terms (1000 MHz vs 1002 MHz), but the GDDR5's effective 4 Gbps versus DDR3's 2 Gbps doubles the data rate.

The bus interface differs as well: PCIe 3.0 x8 for the R5 M430 versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for the Quadro P400. The NVIDIA card also supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the AMD part is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). Vulkan support is present on both, but the Quadro P400 lists version 1.4 versus 1.2.170 for the R5 M430. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M430 averages 5018 points across its benchmark suite, while the NVIDIA Quadro P400 averages 4684. That places the R5 M430 roughly 7.1% ahead in aggregate performance.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare between the two cards?

A: The Quadro P400 provides 32.06 GB/s of bandwidth using GDDR5 memory, while the R5 M430 delivers 16.00 GB/s with DDR3. Despite both using a 64-bit bus, the GDDR5's higher effective clock doubles the bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more shading units, and does that translate to better compute performance?

A: The R5 M430 has 320 shading units versus the Quadro P400's 256. The R5 M430 indeed wins the OpenCL benchmark by 21.3%, but the Quadro P400 counters with a 4.6% Vulkan win, indicating shader count alone does not determine all performance.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two architectures?

A: The Quadro P400's Pascal chip achieves 25.0 million transistors per square millimeter on a 14 nm process, while the R5 M430's GCN 1.0 chip manages 12.3 million per square millimeter on 28 nm. This is a direct result of the newer manufacturing node.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The Quadro P400 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the R5 M430 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). This could impact compatibility with certain modern games or applications that require the higher feature level.

Q: Which card has better pixel throughput?

A: The Quadro P400 achieves 20.03 GPixel/s, nearly three times the R5 M430's 6.840 GPixel/s. This is driven by the Quadro P400's 16 ROPs versus 8 on the R5 M430, plus the NVIDIA card's higher clock speeds.

# Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. Starting with the fundamental architecture: AMD uses GCN 1.0 on a 28 nm TSMC process, while NVIDIA uses Pascal on a 14 nm Samsung process. Transistor counts are 690 million versus 3,300 million, with die sizes of 56 mm² versus 132 mm². Transistor density is 12.3M per mm² versus 25.0M per mm².

Clock speeds favor the Quadro P400: 1228 MHz base and 1252 MHz boost versus 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost. Memory configurations diverge completely—the R5 M430 has 4 GB of DDR3 at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), while the Quadro P400 has 2 GB of GDDR5 at 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective). Both use a 64-bit bus, but bandwidth is 16.00 GB/s versus 32.06 GB/s.

Compute unit counts differ: 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs for the R5 M430, versus 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 16 ROPs for the Quadro P400. Pixel rates are 6.840 GPixel/s versus 20.03 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 17.10 GTexel/s versus 20.03 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 547.2 GFLOPS for the AMD part versus 641.0 GFLOPS for the NVIDIA part. The Quadro P400 also lists FP16 at 10.02 GFLOPS (1:64), while the R5 M430 has no FP16 specification.

The Quadro P400 is a discrete card with a 30 W TDP, single-slot design, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 200 W. It measures 150 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The R5 M430 is an integrated GPU (IGP) with portable-device-dependent display outputs. The Quadro P400 offers 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Bus interfaces are PCIe 3.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. DirectX support is 12 (11_1) versus 12 (12_1), and Vulkan support is 1.2.170 versus 1.4. The Quadro P400 was released on February 6, 2017, while the R5 M430 has no listed release date.

# The Verdict

The data presents a nuanced picture with no outright winner. The AMD Radeon R5 M430 wins the OpenCL test by 21.3% and holds a higher average benchmark score (5018 vs 4684) and a better percentile ranking (30th vs 27th). The NVIDIA Quadro P400 wins the Vulkan test by 4.6% and offers dramatically higher bandwidth, pixel rate, and FP32 performance.

For raw compute workloads that leverage OpenCL, the R5 M430 is the clear choice based on benchmark results. Its 21.3% lead is substantial and consistent with its higher shading unit count. However, the Quadro P400's advantages in memory bandwidth, pixel throughput, and modern API support suggest it is better suited for graphics-intensive tasks or workloads that rely on newer rendering paths. The Quadro P400's 2x memory bandwidth could be decisive for bandwidth-limited scenarios, while its 16 ROPs and 20.03 GPixel/s pixel rate enable faster fill-rate-dependent operations.

The average benchmark score difference of 334 points (5018 vs 4684) favors the R5 M430, but the Quadro P400's higher FP32 (641.0 GFLOPS vs 547.2 GFLOPS) indicates better raw math throughput on paper. Interestingly, the R5 M430's OpenCL win contradicts its lower FP32 figure, suggesting driver efficiency or architectural quirks play a significant role. The Quadro P400's Vulkan win, despite lower shading units, points to better modern-API implementation.

Neither card is positioned for high-end performance—both sit in the bottom third of all GPUs. The R5 M430's nearest rival is the AMD FirePro W4170M, just 0.3% behind, while the Quadro P400 sits within 1.2% of four different cards. This suggests the Quadro P400 is in a more competitive performance band, while the R5 M430 has a slightly more distinct position.

# Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M430 wins in scenarios that favor OpenCL compute. Its 21.3% advantage in the Geekbench OpenCL test is the largest margin in any benchmark. This could translate to better performance in legacy compute applications, OpenCL-accelerated productivity tools, or workloads that do not leverage Vulkan. The R5 M430 also wins on memory capacity with 4 GB versus 2 GB, which could be beneficial for larger datasets that fit within VRAM. Its higher shading unit count (320 vs 256) may also help in shader-heavy workloads that are not bandwidth-limited.

The NVIDIA Quadro P400 wins in Vulkan-based workloads, taking the Geekbench Vulkan test by 4.6%. This indicates better modern API optimization, which could matter for newer games or applications that prioritize Vulkan. The Quadro P400's 2x memory bandwidth (32.06 GB/s vs 16.00 GB/s) makes it superior for bandwidth-bound operations like high-resolution texture streaming or compute tasks that repeatedly access memory. Its 16 ROPs and 20.03 GPixel/s pixel rate give it a nearly 3x advantage in pixel fill, making it better for rasterization-heavy graphics work. The Quadro P400 also delivers higher FP32 performance (641.0 GFLOPS vs 547.2 GFLOPS) and includes FP16 support, though limited to 10.02 GFLOPS.

The Quadro P400 additionally wins on connectivity and flexibility: it is a discrete single-slot card with 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, whereas the R5 M430 is integrated with portable-device-dependent outputs. The Quadro P400's PCIe 3.0 x16 interface doubles the R5 M430's x8 bandwidth allocation. Its lower TDP of 30 W and suggested 200 W PSU make it easier to integrate into compact systems, while the R5 M430's IGP nature means it requires no separate power but is limited to the host device's design. For users needing multi-display setups or workstation features, the Quadro P400's output configuration is clearly superior. For users prioritizing OpenCL compute and larger memory capacity, the R5 M430 is the data-supported choice.