AMD Radeon R7 M445 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data divides cleanly between these two mobile graphics solutions. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M wins the only recorded head-to-head test, the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, with a score of 5986 against the AMD Radeon R7 M445's 5358. That is an 11.7% advantage for the Quadro, a meaningful gap in raw compute throughput. The Radeon R7 M445 does not win any recorded benchmark in this comparison, so its case rests entirely on other characteristics rather than measured performance superiority.

Looking at the broader database context, the Quadro K4000M sits at the 34th percentile among all GPUs, while the Radeon R7 M445 sits at the 31st percentile. These are close positions in the overall distribution, but the Quadro edges ahead. The Quadro's nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro W4100 at a score of 5987 (a negligible 0% delta), the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 at 5982 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server at 5996 (0.2% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M at 6000 (0.2% ahead). This clustering suggests the Quadro K4000M is right in the middle of a tight performance band, not an outlier in either direction.

The Radeon R7 M445's nearest rivals tell a similar story of tight competition. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 scores 5370 (0.2% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce 840M scores 5322 (0.7% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce 930A scores 5317 (0.8% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M scores 5308 (0.9% behind). The Radeon is essentially neck-and-neck with these parts, with deltas under 1% in every case. This means the R7 M445 is not dramatically faster or slower than its immediate peers; it sits within a narrow performance envelope.

The use-case split, therefore, favors the Quadro K4000M for any workload that stresses OpenCL compute performance. The data shows a consistent, if modest, advantage. The Radeon R7 M445, lacking any benchmark win here, would be chosen on the basis of other factors, such as its newer architecture generation, different feature set, or system integration characteristics, rather than demonstrated performance supremacy.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M is faster, scoring 5986 compared to the AMD Radeon R7 M445's 5358. This represents an 11.7% difference in favor of the Quadro.

Q: How do these two GPUs compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Quadro K4000M sits in a cluster with the AMD FirePro W4100 (5987, 0% delta) and NVIDIA Quadro K4000 (5982, 0.1% behind). The Radeon R7 M445 is similarly clustered with the Intel UHD Graphics P630 (5370, 0.2% ahead) and NVIDIA GeForce 840M (5322, 0.7% behind).

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The Quadro K4000M has a 256-bit memory bus with 89.60 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon R7 M445 has a 64-bit bus with 32.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro's bandwidth is substantially higher, which aligns with its higher benchmark score.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M445 has a higher boost clock at 920 MHz, while the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M's boost clock is 601 MHz. Despite the clock disadvantage, the Quadro still wins the compute benchmark.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12, but at different feature levels. The Quadro K4000M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the Radeon R7 M445 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan, with the Quadro supporting Vulkan 1.2.175 and the Radeon supporting Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two chips?

A: The Quadro K4000M's GK104 chip contains 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The Radeon R7 M445's Meso chip contains 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die. The Quadro has more than twice the transistor count.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single recorded benchmark, geekbench_opencl, provides the entire comparative picture. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M scores 5986, and the AMD Radeon R7 M445 scores 5358. The delta is 11.7% in favor of the Quadro. This is not a marginal difference; it is a clear, measurable performance gap that would manifest in any OpenCL-accelerated application.

To contextualize the Quadro's 5986 score, consider its nearest rivals. The AMD FirePro W4100 scores 5987, essentially identical. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 scores 5982, 0.1% lower. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scores 5996, 0.2% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M scores 6000, 0.2% higher. The Quadro K4000M is therefore not an exceptional performer; it is squarely within a cluster of GPUs scoring around 5980 to 6000. This suggests the K4000M delivers compute performance typical of its generation and class, neither a standout nor a laggard.

The Radeon R7 M445's 5358 score places it in a lower performance band. Its nearest rivals include the Intel UHD Graphics P630 at 5370 (0.2% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce 840M at 5322 (0.7% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce 930A at 5317 (0.8% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M at 5308 (0.9% lower). The R7 M445 is the second-highest scorer in this group, ahead of three NVIDIA parts but behind the Intel integrated solution. The deltas are all under 1%, meaning the R7 M445 is competitively positioned among low-end mobile GPUs, but it operates in a fundamentally different performance tier than the Quadro K4000M.

The 11.7% gap between the two compared GPUs is substantial in the context of these tight rival clusters. The Quadro's score of 5986 would place it roughly 11% above the Radeon's 5358, a difference that could translate into noticeably faster render times or compute throughput in real workloads. The data does not show any benchmark where the Radeon wins, so the head-to-head record is 1-0 in favor of the Quadro.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M uses a GK104 chip, while the AMD Radeon R7 M445 uses a Meso chip. The Quadro's base and boost clocks are both 601 MHz, whereas the Radeon's base clock is 780 MHz and its boost clock reaches 920 MHz. Despite the Radeon's higher clocks, the Quadro wins the benchmark, indicating that other factors such as core count and memory bandwidth dominate performance.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The Quadro has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 89.60 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon also has 4 GB of GDDR5 but on a 64-bit bus, yielding only 32.00 GB/s. The Quadro's memory bandwidth is 2.8 times higher, a decisive advantage for memory-intensive workloads. The memory clock differs as well: the Quadro runs at 700 MHz (2.8 Gbps effective), while the Radeon runs at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The Radeon's faster memory clock cannot compensate for its narrower bus.

Compute resources also differ substantially. The Quadro has 960 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Radeon has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The Quadro's pixel rate is 12.02 GPixel/s versus the Radeon's 7.360 GPixel/s. Its texture rate is 48.08 GTexel/s versus 18.40 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,153.9 GFLOPS for the Quadro and 588.8 GFLOPS for the Radeon. The Radeon does offer FP16 at 588.8 GFLOPS (1:1), while the Quadro has no recorded FP16 capability.

The power and interface profiles differ as well. The Quadro has a TDP of 100 W and uses an MXM Module slot width with an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface. The Radeon has no recorded TDP, uses an IGP slot width, and connects via PCIe 3.0 x8. Neither GPU has a power connector listed, and both have display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent." Both are end-of-life products, with the Quadro released on 2012-05-31 and the Radeon on 2016-05-14.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is significant. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M is built on the Kepler architecture, part of the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx000M) generation. The AMD Radeon R7 M445 uses the GCN 3.0 architecture, part of the Gem System (R7 M400) generation. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but the chips are very different in scale. The Quadro's GK104 die measures 294 mm² and contains 3,540 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 12.0 million per mm². The Radeon's Meso die measures 125 mm² and contains 1,550 million transistors, with a density of 12.4 million per mm². The Quadro's die is more than twice the size and has more than twice the transistor count.

The Kepler architecture in the Quadro is designed for professional workstation tasks, with a focus on compute and graphics precision. The GCN 3.0 architecture in the Radeon represents a newer design generation, with support for DirectX 12 (12_0) compared to the Quadro's DirectX 12 (11_0). This means the Radeon supports a higher DirectX feature level, which could matter for certain modern games or applications that require those features. However, the Quadro's much larger silicon and higher transistor count give it the raw compute advantage that shows up in the OpenCL benchmark.

Vulkan support is nearly identical, with the Quadro at version 1.2.175 and the Radeon at 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The Radeon's FP16 support at a 1:1 ratio with FP32 is a notable architectural feature absent from the Quadro's specifications. The Quadro's predecessor is the Quadro Fermi-M and its successor is the Quadro Maxwell-M, while the Radeon's predecessor is Solar System and its successor is Polaris Mobile. These lineage details place each GPU in a distinct evolutionary path within their respective manufacturers.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for compute performance: the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 5986 beats the AMD Radeon R7 M445's 5358 by 11.7%, and it holds the only recorded benchmark win. The Quadro's advantages in shading units (960 vs 320), TMUs (80 vs 20), ROPs (32 vs 8), memory bus width (256-bit vs 64-bit), memory bandwidth (89.60 GB/s vs 32.00 GB/s), and FP32 throughput (1,153.9 GFLOPS vs 588.8 GFLOPS) are all consistent with its higher benchmark score. The Quadro also sits at a higher percentile (34th vs 31st) among all GPUs in the database.

However, the Radeon R7 M445 is not without merits. It has higher clock speeds (920 MHz boost vs 601 MHz), a newer architecture (GCN 3.0 vs Kepler), support for DirectX 12 (12_0) compared to the Quadro's (11_0), and FP16 compute capability. Its smaller die (125 mm² vs 294 mm²) and lower transistor count (1,550 million vs 3,540 million) suggest it is a more power-efficient design, though no TDP is recorded for the Radeon to confirm this. The Radeon also supports a newer Vulkan version (1.2.170, though slightly lower than the Quadro's 1.2.175) and was released four years later.

For a buyer prioritizing raw compute and memory bandwidth, the Quadro K4000M is the data-backed choice. For a buyer prioritizing architectural modernity, DirectX 12 feature level, or FP16 support, the Radeon R7 M445 has qualitative advantages, but the benchmark data does not show it winning any performance test. The Quadro's nearest rivals cluster tightly around 5986-6000, indicating it is a solid mid-pack performer in its era. The Radeon's rivals cluster around 5308-5370, placing it in a lower performance tier. If OpenCL compute is the primary criterion, the Quadro is the superior part. If the workload demands the Radeon's specific feature set, such as FP16 or DirectX 12 (12_0), then the Radeon becomes relevant, but the recorded data cannot substantiate a performance win for it.