AMD Radeon R7 Graphics vs NVIDIA Quadro P400 Comparison

AMD Radeon R7 Graphics and NVIDIA Quadro P400 are both end-of-life parts aimed at very different corners of the market, and the benchmark data reflects that split. The R7 Graphics is an integrated GPU from AMD's Kaveri APU era, while the P400 is a low-profile discrete workstation card from NVIDIA's Pascal generation. Their average benchmark scores are close — 4998 for the AMD part versus 4684 for the NVIDIA part — and their overall percentile rankings are nearly identical (29th vs. 27th percentile of all GPUs). But the individual test results tell a story of two very different strengths, with each card winning decisively in one of the two head-to-head benchmarks.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics wins on raw compute throughput in the Vulkan API, while the NVIDIA Quadro P400 wins in OpenCL. The head-to-head data shows the R7 Graphics scoring 5980 in Geekbench Vulkan, a full 16.8% ahead of the P400's 5119 in that same test. This is a substantial margin, indicating that the R7 Graphics has a significant advantage in workloads that leverage Vulkan's compute capabilities — think gaming-oriented tasks or modern graphics APIs that can take advantage of the R7's 384 shading units.

Conversely, the Quadro P400 takes the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 4249 versus the R7 Graphics' 4015, a 5.5% lead. OpenCL is the more traditional general-purpose compute API, and the P400's advantage here — despite having fewer shading units (256 vs. 384) — points to NVIDIA's architecture being more efficient in this workload. The P400 also posts a higher raw FP32 throughput (641.0 GFLOPS vs. 553.0 GFLOPS), which helps explain its OpenCL edge.

In terms of the nearest rivals, the R7 Graphics sits in a cluster with the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 (deltaPct 0.4%), AMD Radeon R5 M430 (deltaPct -0.4%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB (deltaPct 0.6%), and AMD FirePro W4170M (deltaPct -0.7%). The P400's rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB (deltaPct 0.6%), AMD Radeon R5 M320 (deltaPct 0.6%), AMD Radeon R8 M445DX (deltaPct -0.9%), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M (deltaPct 1.2%). These tight deltaPct values — all under 1.2% — show that both cards are performance peers within their respective tiers, not outliers.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P400 has higher FP32 throughput at 641.0 GFLOPS compared to the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics' 553.0 GFLOPS. This translates to a 16% advantage in raw floating-point compute, which helps it win the OpenCL benchmark.

Q: Why does the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics win the Vulkan benchmark by such a large margin?

A: Despite having lower FP32 throughput, the R7 Graphics scores 5980 in Geekbench Vulkan versus the P400's 5119 — a 16.8% advantage. This suggests the R7's 384 shading units (versus 256 on the P400) scale better with Vulkan's parallel workload distribution, or that the driver implementation for Vulkan on this GCN 2.0 part is more efficient.

Q: Which card consumes less power?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics has a TDP of 25 W, which is lower than the NVIDIA Quadro P400's 30 W. However, the R7 is an integrated GPU (IGP) with no dedicated slot width or power connectors, while the P400 is a single-slot discrete card that draws power from the PCIe slot.

Q: What are the memory configurations?

A: The R7 Graphics uses system-shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent" — it has no dedicated VRAM. The Quadro P400 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus with 32.06 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which card is better for modern API support?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P400 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The P400 has a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

Q: How do their overall performance percentiles compare?

A: The R7 Graphics sits at the 29th percentile of all GPUs, while the P400 sits at the 27th percentile. Despite the P400 winning the OpenCL test, the R7's strong Vulkan showing gives it a higher average benchmark score (4998 vs. 4684).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards split the head-to-head tests exactly one win each. The most striking result is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics posts a score of 5980 against the NVIDIA Quadro P400's 5119. That is a 16.8% delta in favor of the AMD part — the largest margin in either direction across these two benchmarks. This is not a small edge; it represents a substantial performance gap in Vulkan-based compute or rendering tasks. The R7's advantage likely stems from its larger shading unit count (384 vs. 256) and the way GCN architecture handles the Vulkan API's asynchronous compute queues.

The Geekbench OpenCL result flips the script. The Quadro P400 scores 4249, beating the R7 Graphics' 4015 by 5.5%. While the margin is smaller than the Vulkan gap, it is still a clear win for the NVIDIA card. The P400's advantage in OpenCL correlates with its higher FP32 throughput (641.0 GFLOPS), higher pixel rate (20.03 GPixel/s vs. 5.760 GPixel/s), and higher texture rate (20.03 GTexel/s vs. 17.28 GTexel/s). Interestingly, the P400 also has more ROPs (16 vs. 8), which could contribute to its OpenCL compute efficiency.

When you average these two results, the R7 Graphics comes out ahead on aggregate — its average benchmark score is 4998 versus 4684 for the P400, which is roughly a 6.7% overall lead. This is consistent with the R7's higher percentile ranking (29th vs. 27th). However, the choice between these cards should not be made on average scores alone; the API-specific performance differences are large enough to dictate which card is better for a given workload.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every hardware specification. The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics is built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries, using 2,410 million transistors on a 245 mm² die. The NVIDIA Quadro P400 uses a 14 nm process at Samsung, packing 3,300 million transistors into a much smaller 132 mm² die. This translates to a transistor density of 25.0M per mm² for the P400 versus 9.8M per mm² for the R7 — a significant manufacturing advantage for the newer NVIDIA part.

Shader configuration differs substantially: the R7 has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs, while the P400 has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The R7 has more compute units but fewer ROPs, which affects pixel fill rate — the P400 delivers 20.03 GPixel/s versus the R7's 5.760 GPixel/s, a 3.5x advantage for NVIDIA. The texture rate is closer but still favors the P400 (20.03 GTexel/s vs. 17.28 GTexel/s).

Clocks and memory are completely different. The R7 has no fixed base or boost clock (system-dependent as an IGP), while the P400 runs at 1228 MHz base and 1252 MHz boost. Memory is the biggest differentiator: the R7 uses system-shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, while the P400 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus with 32.06 GB/s bandwidth. The P400 also has a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the R7 is an IGP with no separate bus interface.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap here is generational. The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics uses GCN 2.0 architecture (specifically the Spectre Lite chip from the Kaveri generation), while the NVIDIA Quadro P400 uses Pascal architecture with a GP107 chip. GCN 2.0 is an older design focused on parallelism with large shader arrays, while Pascal is a more modern, efficiency-oriented architecture with better hardware scheduling.

The process node difference is stark: 28 nm for AMD versus 14 nm for NVIDIA. This explains the die size and density differences — NVIDIA fits 37% more transistors into a die that is 46% smaller. The R7 is manufactured by GlobalFoundries, while the P400 comes from Samsung's fabs.

API support differs notably. The R7 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the P400 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. The P400 also lists FP16 support at 10.02 GFLOPS (at a 1:64 ratio), while the R7 has no FP16 data. The R7's display outputs are motherboard-dependent (as an IGP), while the P400 has 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split decision. If your workload leans on Vulkan — modern game engines, Vulkan-based compute, or ray tracing pipelines that use the API — the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics is the stronger choice, with a 16.8% lead over the P400 in Geekbench Vulkan. Its 384 shading units give it a raw parallel compute advantage that the Vulkan driver seems to exploit well.

If your workload is OpenCL-based — many professional compute tasks, some CAD applications, or older game engines — the NVIDIA Quadro P400 is the better pick, winning Geekbench OpenCL by 5.5%. Its higher FP32 throughput (641.0 GFLOPS), better pixel rate (20.03 GPixel/s), and dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 32.06 GB/s bandwidth make it more capable for memory-bound compute tasks.

For general-purpose use, the R7 Graphics has a higher average benchmark score (4998 vs. 4684) and a higher percentile ranking (29th vs. 27th). But the P400's architecture is significantly more modern, with a 14 nm process, higher transistor density (25.0M/mm² vs. 9.8M/mm²), and better API support (Vulkan 1.4 vs. 1.2.170). The P400 also has a lower power draw per unit of compute efficiency, though its total TDP is higher at 30 W vs. 25 W.

The practical reality is that the R7 Graphics only exists as an integrated GPU in Kaveri APUs, limiting it to systems with those specific processors. The P400 is a discrete single-slot card that can be installed in any PCIe 3.0 x16 slot. If you need dedicated VRAM for professional workloads, the P400's 2 GB GDDR5 is a hard requirement that the R7 cannot meet. If you are building a compact, low-power system and Vulkan performance is your priority, the R7's IGP design offers a competitive score without any additional card. Choose based on your API focus and your system's expansion capabilities — the performance numbers alone do not pick a clear winner.