AMD Radeon R7 M365X vs NVIDIA Quadro 4000 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 M365X and NVIDIA Quadro 4000 represent two very different approaches to mobile and workstation graphics, separated by nearly five years of architectural evolution. In the only direct benchmark comparison available, the AMD Radeon R7 M365X decisively outperforms the NVIDIA Quadro 4000, delivering a 19.3% higher OpenCL score. This result places the R7 M365X in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro 4000 sits in the 29th percentile, confirming that the newer AMD part is not just faster in a single test but also ranks higher in the overall performance distribution.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole head-to-head benchmark between these two cards is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are unambiguous. The AMD Radeon R7 M365X scores 5,939 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 scores 4,979 points. This yields a 19.3% advantage for the AMD card, a substantial margin that reflects the generational gap between the two architectures. The R7 M365X's average benchmark score across all tests is 5,416, which is consistent with its OpenCL result, while the Quadro 4000's average score is exactly its OpenCL score of 4,979, indicating that this single test is the only data point for the NVIDIA part.

Looking at the competitive landscape, the AMD Radeon R7 M365X's closest rival is the AMD Radeon 610M, which scores 5,444 on average, a mere 0.5% lower than the R7 M365X's 5,416 average. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB, which scores 4,970 on average, just 0.2% below the Quadro 4000's 4,979. This is a notable comparison—the ancient Fermi-based Quadro 4000 is statistically tied with a modern RTX 50-series card in this benchmark, highlighting how compute workloads can favor different architectural strengths. However, in the direct head-to-head, the R7 M365X's 19.3% lead over the Quadro 4000 is the definitive result.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 M365X wins the only benchmark category where both cards have data, which is Geekbench OpenCL. This win is significant because OpenCL is a general-purpose compute API that stresses raw parallel processing capability. The R7 M365X's 384 shading units, operating at a texture rate of 19.80 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 6.600 GPixel/s, give it a clear computational edge over the Quadro 4000's 256 shading units, which achieve 15.20 GTexel/s and 7.600 GPixel/s. Notably, the Quadro 4000 has a higher pixel rate despite fewer shading units, suggesting its 32 ROPs are more efficient at fill-rate-bound tasks than the R7 M365X's 8 ROPs.

The NVIDIA Quadro 4000 wins in areas that are not covered by the head-to-head benchmark but are evident from the specification differences. It offers 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding 89.86 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to the R7 M365X's 1 GB on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s. For memory-bandwidth-intensive workloads, such as large texture sets or high-resolution framebuffers, the Quadro 4000 has a 40.4% bandwidth advantage. Additionally, the Quadro 4000's 32 ROPs versus the R7 M365X's 8 ROPs means it is better suited to tasks that require heavy pixel throughput, even though its overall FP32 compute is lower at 486.4 GFLOPS versus 633.6 GFLOPS.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M365X is 19.3% faster in the Geekbench OpenCL test, scoring 5,939 compared to the NVIDIA Quadro 4000's 4,979.

Q: How do these cards rank against all other GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M365X is in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 is in the 29th percentile, indicating the AMD card has a slightly higher overall performance standing.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 4000 has 89.86 GB/s of bandwidth, which is 40.4% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M365X's 64.00 GB/s.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each card based on average benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M365X's closest rival is the AMD Radeon 610M (5,444 average score, 0.5% lower), while the NVIDIA Quadro 4000's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB (4,970 average score, 0.2% lower).

Q: Does the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 support Vulkan?

A: No, the Vulkan API is listed as null for the NVIDIA Quadro 4000, whereas the AMD Radeon R7 M365X supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M365X has a transistor density of 12.3M per mm², more than double the NVIDIA Quadro 4000's 5.9M per mm².

Specification Differences

The two cards differ fundamentally in their core configurations. The AMD Radeon R7 M365X features 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 render output units (ROPs). The NVIDIA Quadro 4000 has fewer shading units at 256, but more TMUs at 32 and significantly more ROPs at 32. This configuration explains the performance split: the R7 M365X achieves a texture rate of 19.80 GTexel/s versus the Quadro 4000's 15.20 GTexel/s, but the Quadro 4000 achieves a higher pixel rate of 7.600 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s.

Memory configurations also diverge sharply. The AMD card ships with 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth at an effective 4 Gbps. The NVIDIA card doubles the capacity to 2 GB, uses a 256-bit bus, and offers 89.86 GB/s at an effective 2.8 Gbps. The bus interface differs as well: the R7 M365X uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the Quadro 4000 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The NVIDIA card also carries a 142 W TDP, requiring a single 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU, while the AMD card has no listed TDP or power connector requirements. The Quadro 4000 measures 241 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, occupying a single slot, with display outputs of 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort; the R7 M365X has no listed dimensions or display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R7 M365X is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, using a chip codenamed "Litho" as part of the Gem System generation. It contains 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². In contrast, the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 uses the Fermi architecture with the GF100 chip, manufactured on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. The Fermi chip is dramatically larger, with 3,100 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, but the older process results in a much lower transistor density of just 5.9M per mm².

The API support also reflects their respective eras. The R7 M365X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Quadro 4000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but has no Vulkan support. The release dates show a significant gap: the R7 M365X launched on May 4, 2015, while the Quadro 4000 launched on November 1, 2010, making the AMD card nearly five years newer. The production status for both is end-of-life, with the R7 M365X's predecessor being "Solar System" and its successor "Polaris Mobile," while the Quadro 4000's predecessor is "Quadro FX Tesla" and its successor is "Quadro Kepler." The Quadro 4000 also has a launch MSRP of 1,199 USD, while the R7 M365X has no recorded launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data clearly indicates that the AMD Radeon R7 M365X is the superior choice for general compute performance. Its 19.3% lead in the only head-to-head benchmark, combined with its higher percentile ranking (32nd vs. 29th), makes it the more capable card for OpenCL-based workloads. The R7 M365X's newer 28 nm process and GCN architecture deliver 633.6 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is 30.2% higher than the Quadro 4000's 486.4 GFLOPS, and its 384 shading units provide a substantial advantage in parallel execution.

However, the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 is not without merit for specific use cases. Its 2 GB of VRAM (double the R7 M365X's 1 GB) and 89.86 GB/s of memory bandwidth make it better suited for applications that are memory-bound rather than compute-bound. The Quadro 4000's 32 ROPs also give it a 15.2% higher pixel rate, which could benefit certain rasterization tasks. For users working with large datasets or high-resolution textures where memory capacity is critical, the Quadro 4000's larger framebuffer is a tangible advantage.

For most modern workloads, the AMD Radeon R7 M365X is the recommended pick due to its superior compute performance, newer architecture, and support for Vulkan. The Quadro 4000 should only be considered for legacy applications that specifically require its memory bandwidth or pixel throughput characteristics, or where the 2 GB VRAM capacity is a hard requirement. The benchmark data is conclusive: the R7 M365X wins the compute battle, and its higher percentile ranking confirms it is the better overall GPU for contemporary tasks.