AMD Radeon R7 Graphics vs NVIDIA Quadro 4000M Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M and AMD Radeon R7 Graphics represent two fundamentally different approaches to mobile graphics. The data shows a discrete professional GPU from 2011 facing off against a 2014 integrated processor. Their average benchmark scores are remarkably close, yet their architectural philosophies and performance profiles diverge sharply.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear split decision. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M wins the only direct head-to-head comparison, scoring 5211 in Geekbench OpenCL against the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics' 4015, a 29.8% advantage. This is the sole benchmark where both products appear, so it carries substantial weight. The Quadro 4000M also holds a 30th percentile ranking versus the R7 Graphics' 29th, indicating a marginally better position relative to all GPUs.

However, the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics demonstrates a different strength. It scores 5980 in Geekbench Vulkan, a test the Quadro 4000M does not appear in at all. This suggests the R7 Graphics has broader API support for modern workloads. The Quadro 4000M shows no Vulkan support in its API listing, while the R7 Graphics lists Vulkan 1.2.170.

For professional OpenCL workloads, the data clearly favors the Quadro 4000M. Its 29.8% lead is decisive and consistent with its dedicated memory subsystem. The R7 Graphics, conversely, is the better choice for users prioritizing Vulkan compatibility, as it posts a strong score in that API. The Quadro 4000M's nearest rivals include the GeForce GTX 760M (5236, -0.5%), GeForce 940M (5284, -1.4%), and Radeon R7 M260X (5161, 1%). The R7 Graphics sits close to the Quadro 4000 (4979, 0.4%) and Radeon R5 M430 (5018, -0.4%), showing it competes with entry-level discrete parts despite being an IGP.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras and design philosophies. The Quadro 4000M uses the GF104 chip built on the Fermi architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 40 nm process. It packs 1,950 million transistors into a 332 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.9 million per square millimeter. The R7 Graphics uses the Spectre Lite chip on GCN 2.0 architecture, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 28 nm node. It contains 2,410 million transistors on a smaller 245 mm² die, achieving a higher density of 9.8 million per square millimeter.

The memory configurations could not be more different. The Quadro 4000M has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 80.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 Graphics relies entirely on System Shared memory, with its bandwidth listed as System Dependent. This is a critical distinction. The Quadro's dedicated memory ensures consistent performance, while the R7 Graphics' performance hinges on the host system's memory speed and configuration.

Compute resources also differ substantially. The Quadro 4000M has 336 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The R7 Graphics counters with 384 shading units but only 24 TMUs and 8 ROPs. The Quadro's higher TMU and ROP counts translate to superior texture and pixel throughput: 26.60 GTexel/s and 6.650 GPixel/s, respectively, versus the R7 Graphics' 17.28 GTexel/s and 5.760 GPixel/s. Raw FP32 performance tells a different story, with the Quadro at 638.4 GFLOPS and the R7 Graphics at 553.0 GFLOPS.

Power consumption is a major differentiator. The Quadro 4000M draws 100 W, while the R7 Graphics sips just 25 W. This fourfold difference reflects the Quadro's discrete nature and the R7's integration into an APU. The Quadro uses an MXM Module slot with MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, while the R7 Graphics is an IGP with no separate power connectors.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M wins decisively in OpenCL compute performance. Its 29.8% lead in the head-to-head benchmark is the largest margin in the data. This advantage likely stems from its dedicated GDDR5 memory with 80.00 GB/s bandwidth versus the R7 Graphics' system-shared memory. The Quadro also has higher pixel and texture rates, making it better suited for tasks that stress those units. Its 32 ROPs versus 8 means it can handle rasterization operations more efficiently.

The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics wins in API versatility. It supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the Quadro 4000M only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0). More importantly, the R7 Graphics has Vulkan 1.2.170 support and scores 5980 in Geekbench Vulkan. The Quadro 4000M lists no Vulkan support whatsoever. This makes the R7 Graphics the only option for Vulkan-based applications between the two.

The R7 Graphics also wins on efficiency. At 25 W, it consumes a quarter of the Quadro's 100 W. This makes it suitable for compact systems without discrete graphics. The Quadro's 100 W requirement, combined with its MXM Module form factor, means it needs a larger chassis with adequate cooling.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M leads in FP32 with 638.4 GFLOPS compared to the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics' 553.0 GFLOPS. It also wins the OpenCL benchmark 5211 to 4015, a 29.8% margin.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics support Vulkan?

A: Yes, it lists Vulkan 1.2.170 support and scores 5980 in Geekbench Vulkan. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M lists no Vulkan support in its API specifications.

Q: How does memory configuration affect performance?

A: The Quadro 4000M has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 80.00 GB/s bandwidth. The R7 Graphics uses System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth, meaning its memory performance varies with the host system.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The Quadro 4000M has a 100 W TDP, while the Radeon R7 Graphics has a 25 W TDP. The Quadro requires an MXM Module slot, while the R7 Graphics is an IGP with no power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics has 384 shading units, compared to 336 on the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M. However, the Quadro has more TMUs (56 vs 24) and ROPs (32 vs 8).

Q: How do their overall performance rankings compare?

A: The Quadro 4000M sits at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, while the R7 Graphics is at the 29th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are 5211 and 4998, respectively.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M scores 5211, while the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics scores 4015. This gives the Quadro a 29.8% advantage. To put this in perspective, consider the Quadro's nearest rivals: the GeForce GTX 760M scores 5236 (-0.5% relative to the Quadro), and the GeForce 940M scores 5284 (-1.4%). The Quadro's lead over the R7 Graphics is far larger than its deficit to these rivals, showing the R7 Graphics trails substantially in this workload.

The R7 Graphics' nearest rivals tell a different story. The Quadro 4000 scores 4979 (0.4% relative to the R7), and the Radeon R5 M430 scores 5018 (-0.4%). These deltas are minuscule, placing the R7 Graphics in the same performance tier as those discrete cards. Yet against the Quadro 4000M, the R7 Graphics falls behind by a significant margin.

The Vulkan benchmark adds another dimension. The R7 Graphics scores 5980 here, which is 49% higher than its own OpenCL score of 4015. This suggests the GCN 2.0 architecture handles Vulkan workloads particularly well. Since the Quadro 4000M has no Vulkan support, this entire performance domain belongs exclusively to the R7 Graphics.

The data implies that in mixed workloads, the choice depends heavily on API. For OpenCL-heavy tasks, the Quadro 4000M is overwhelmingly superior. For Vulkan-based applications, the R7 Graphics is the only option that works at all.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The process node shows a generational gap: 40 nm for NVIDIA versus 28 nm for AMD. Transistor counts are 1,950 million versus 2,410 million, with die sizes of 332 mm² versus 245 mm². The transistor density reflects this, at 5.9M per mm² for the Quadro and 9.8M per mm² for the R7.

Memory is perhaps the most consequential difference. The Quadro 4000M has 2 GB of GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus and 80.00 GB/s bandwidth. The R7 Graphics uses System Shared memory with System Shared type and bus width, and its bandwidth is System Dependent. This means the Quadro has predictable, fixed memory performance, while the R7 relies entirely on external factors.

Compute unit counts vary. The Quadro has 336 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The R7 Graphics has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel rate is 6.650 GPixel/s versus 5.760 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 26.60 GTexel/s versus 17.28 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 638.4 GFLOPS versus 553.0 GFLOPS.

Power and form factor differ dramatically. The Quadro 4000M has a 100 W TDP, uses an MXM Module slot, and has no power connectors. The R7 Graphics has a 25 W TDP, is an IGP, and has no power connectors listed. The bus interface is MXM-B (3.0) for NVIDIA and IGP for AMD.

API support shows the R7 Graphics as more modern. It supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the Quadro 4000M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but no Vulkan. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The production status is End-of-life for both, with the Quadro releasing in February 2011 and the R7 Graphics in February 2014. Their predecessors and successors also differ, with the Quadro following the Quadro FX Mobile and preceding the Quadro Kepler-M, while the R7 Graphics follows the TeraScale 3 IGP and precedes the GCN 3.0 IGP.