AMD Radeon R6 M255DX vs NVIDIA Quadro K2100M Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the recorded Vulkan benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX wins the head-to-head Vulkan test with a score of 4867, which is 12.1% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M's score of 4343.

Q: How do these two GPUs compare in overall benchmark position?

A: The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX sits at the 28th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M is at the 25th percentile. The AMD part's average benchmark score is 4867, versus 4151 for the NVIDIA part.

Q: What are the closest rivals to the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX?

A: The nearest competitors are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (0.7% ahead), NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (0.5% ahead), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M (0.2% behind), and NVIDIA GeForce 940MX (0.5% behind).

Q: What are the closest rivals to the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M?

A: The nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (1% ahead), AMD Radeon R5 M330 (0.4% ahead), AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB (1.4% behind), and Intel HD Graphics 630 (1.9% behind).

Q: Which GPU has the higher shading unit count?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M has 576 shading units, while the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX has 320 shading units. The NVIDIA part also has more texture mapping units (48 vs 20) and more render output units (16 vs 8).

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs use?

A: The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX uses system shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, while the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 48.13 GB/s of bandwidth.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear but narrow victory for the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX in the only directly comparable test. In Vulkan compute performance, the AMD part scores 4867 against 4343 for the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M, a 12.1% advantage. This places the AMD GPU at the 28th percentile versus the NVIDIA part's 25th percentile, meaning the R6 M255DX is slightly closer to the median GPU in the database.

However, the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M brings substantial hardware advantages that the Vulkan score does not capture. It has 576 shading units versus 320, 48 texture units versus 20, and 16 ROPs versus 8. Its theoretical peak FP32 throughput is 768.4 GFLOPS, which is 40% higher than the AMD part's 547.2 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA GPU also has dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 48.13 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the AMD part relies on system shared memory with dependent bandwidth.

For users who prioritize Vulkan compute performance in the database, the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX is the better choice. For workloads that depend on raw shading throughput, texture fill, or dedicated memory bandwidth, the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M appears more capable based on its hardware specifications. The AMD part is a hybrid GPU (IGP class), while the NVIDIA part is an MXM module, which affects how each is integrated into portable devices.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark in the database is the Geekbench Vulkan test. The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX records 4867 points, and the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M records 4343 points. The AMD part wins by 12.1%, a meaningful margin for a single-test comparison.

Context from the nearest rivals helps interpret this result. The AMD R6 M255DX's score of 4867 is 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M (4855), 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX (4844), and 0.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4893). This places the AMD part in a tight cluster of mid-range mobile and older desktop GPUs.

The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M's Vulkan score of 4343 is 1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (4193 is listed as a rival with a delta of -1%, meaning the K2100M trails it), 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon R5 M330 (4170), 1.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB (4093), and 1.9% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics 630 (4075). The K2100M's position relative to these rivals shows it is competitive with entry-level discrete GPUs but sits below the cluster where the R6 M255DX resides.

It is importantly the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M also has recorded scores in Metal (3524) and OpenCL (4587), which are not available for the AMD part. The average benchmark score across all tests for the NVIDIA GPU is 4151, reflecting the lower Vulkan score and the Metal result.

Specification Differences

The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX and NVIDIA Quadro K2100M differ in nearly every measurable hardware specification.

• Chip and architecture: AMD uses the Jet chip based on GCN 1.0, while NVIDIA uses the GK106S chip based on Kepler.
• Process node: Both are fabricated on TSMC's 28 nm process, but the AMD die is 56 mm² with 690 million transistors, while the NVIDIA die is 221 mm² with 2,540 million transistors. Transistor density is 12.3M per mm² for AMD and 11.5M per mm² for NVIDIA.
• Clocks: AMD has a base clock of 780 MHz and a boost clock of 855 MHz. NVIDIA has a fixed 667 MHz clock for both base and boost. NVIDIA's memory runs at 752 MHz with 3 Gbps effective.
• Memory: AMD uses system shared memory of unspecified size and type, with system dependent bandwidth. NVIDIA has 2 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 48.13 GB/s bandwidth.
• Shading units: 320 for AMD versus 576 for NVIDIA.
• Texture mapping units: 20 for AMD versus 48 for NVIDIA.
• Render output units: 8 for AMD versus 16 for NVIDIA.
• Pixel rate: AMD at 6.840 GPixel/s versus NVIDIA at 8.004 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: AMD at 17.10 GTexel/s versus NVIDIA at 32.02 GTexel/s.
• FP32 throughput: AMD at 547.2 GFLOPS versus NVIDIA at 768.4 GFLOPS.
• Power: NVIDIA has a 55 W TDP; AMD has no recorded TDP.
• Form factor: AMD is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with an IGP bus interface. NVIDIA is an MXM Module with an MXM-A (3.0) bus interface.
• Power connectors: NVIDIA has none; AMD has no recorded connectors.
• API support: Both support DirectX 12 (AMD at 11_1, NVIDIA at 11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan (AMD at 1.2.170, NVIDIA at 1.2.175).
• Display outputs: Both are portable device dependent.
• Release dates: AMD released on 2014-01-06, NVIDIA on 2013-07-22.
• Production status: Both are end-of-life.
• Predecessor and successor: NVIDIA lists a predecessor (Quadro Fermi-M) and successor (Quadro Maxwell-M); AMD has none recorded.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies. AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture, implemented on a 56 mm² die with 690 million transistors, is optimized for compute throughput per area. The 28 nm process yields a transistor density of 12.3M per mm², which is slightly higher than NVIDIA's 11.5M per mm² on a much larger 221 mm² die with 2,540 million transistors.

NVIDIA's Kepler architecture, used in the Quadro K2100M, deploys its transistor budget across more functional units: 576 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This results in higher peak rates across the board: texture fill is 32.02 GTexel/s versus 17.10 GTexel/s, pixel fill is 8.004 GPixel/s versus 6.840 GPixel/s, and FP32 compute is 768.4 GFLOPS versus 547.2 GFLOPS.

The memory architecture differs even more sharply. NVIDIA uses dedicated GDDR5 with a fixed 48.13 GB/s bandwidth. AMD uses system shared memory, making its bandwidth dependent on the host system's memory configuration. In practice, this means the AMD part's memory performance is variable and tied to other system components, while the NVIDIA part has predictable, dedicated bandwidth.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12, but AMD implements the 11_1 feature level while NVIDIA implements 11_0. Vulkan support is similar, with NVIDIA at version 1.2.175 and AMD at 1.2.170. OpenGL 4.6 is supported by both. Neither has ray tracing cores or tensor cores.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon R6 M255DX wins in Vulkan compute performance. The recorded benchmark shows a 12.1% advantage over the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4867 vs 4343). This is the only direct comparison available, and the AMD part comes out ahead. Its percentile rank (28th) is also higher than NVIDIA's (25th), suggesting slightly better overall standing in the database.

NVIDIA Quadro K2100M wins in raw computational throughput. The specifications show 768.4 GFLOPS FP32 performance versus 547.2 GFLOPS for AMD, a 40% advantage. Texture rate is nearly double (32.02 GTexel/s vs 17.10 GTexel/s), and pixel rate is higher (8.004 GPixel/s vs 6.840 GPixel/s). These numbers indicate the NVIDIA part has more headroom for shader-heavy and texture-heavy workloads.

NVIDIA Quadro K2100M wins in memory consistency. With 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 and 48.13 GB/s fixed bandwidth, the NVIDIA part does not depend on system memory performance. The AMD part's system shared memory makes its bandwidth "system dependent," which introduces variability that the NVIDIA part avoids.

AMD Radeon R6 M255DX wins in integration simplicity. As an IGP with an IGP bus interface, it is designed for direct integration into portable devices. The NVIDIA part is an MXM module, which is a different form factor requiring a specific slot. The AMD part also has a higher boost clock (855 MHz) versus NVIDIA's fixed 667 MHz, which helps close the gap in real-world scenarios where boost behavior matters.

Use case split: For users running Vulkan-based applications where the database has a direct measurement, the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX is the safer pick. For users who need predictable memory bandwidth, higher peak fill rates, or more shading units for compute-heavy tasks, the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M offers a stronger specification sheet. The NVIDIA part also has additional benchmark coverage (Metal and OpenCL) that may be relevant for specific software ecosystems.