AMD Radeon R7 M465 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 and AMD Radeon R7 M465 are both end-of-life GPUs, but the data shows a clear overall winner. In the only head-to-head benchmark available, the Quadro K4000 leads by 16.7% in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 6816 against 5841. The Quadro K4000 also holds a higher average benchmark score across all tests (5982 vs 5841) and sits at the 34th percentile of all GPUs, slightly ahead of the R7 M465's 33rd percentile. The verdict is straightforward for raw compute: the Quadro K4000 is the superior part. However, the R7 M465 is not without merit; it is a newer design with a more modern feature set, and its smaller footprint and lower power demands make it suitable for specific compact or mobile-oriented builds. The choice hinges on whether the user prioritizes peak compute performance (Quadro K4000) or architectural modernity and efficiency (R7 M465).

The Verdict

Pick the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 if you need maximum compute throughput. The data is unambiguous here: the Quadro K4000 delivers 6816 points in Geekbench OpenCL, a 16.7% advantage over the R7 M465's 5841. Its FP32 performance is also markedly higher at 1,244.2 GFLOPS versus 786.4 GFLOPS. This makes it the only rational choice for professional workloads like rendering, simulation, or any task that leverages OpenCL acceleration. It also offers 3 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding 134.8 GB/s of bandwidth—nearly four times the R7 M465's 36.00 GB/s. For memory-intensive datasets, this is a decisive factor.

Pick the AMD Radeon R7 M465 if you value modern API support and efficiency. The R7 M465 is architecturally newer, based on GCN 3.0, and supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170, whereas the Quadro K4000 only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The R7 M465 also has a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio, offering 786.4 GFLOPS in half-precision, while the Quadro K4000 has no listed FP16 capability. If the workload is modern, uses half-precision math, or requires the latest graphics API features, the R7 M465 is the more future-proof option despite its lower raw compute. Its 2 GB memory is smaller, but its 64-bit bus is sufficient for lighter tasks.

The tie-breaker is the use case. For a workstation that demands raw OpenCL compute, the Quadro K4000 wins outright. For a system that needs a low-power, modern-API-capable GPU for general use or light gaming, the R7 M465 is the better fit. The Quadro K4000's 80 W TDP and requirement for a 250 W PSU suggest a more power-hungry setup, while the R7 M465 has no listed TDP, indicating it can operate within a more constrained power envelope.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 is built on the Kepler architecture, using the GK106 chip. It is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 2,540 million transistors packed into a 221 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 11.5 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon R7 M465 uses the GCN 3.0 architecture with the Topaz chip. It is also on a 28 nm TSMC process but packs fewer transistors—1,550 million—into a smaller 125 mm² die, achieving a slightly higher density of 12.4 million per square millimeter.

Core configuration differs substantially. The Quadro K4000 has 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 24 ROPs. The R7 M465 has half the shading units at 384, along with 24 TMUs and 8 ROPs. This explains the Quadro's higher texture rate (51.84 GTexel/s vs 24.58 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (12.96 GPixel/s vs 8.192 GPixel/s). The Quadro also has a wider memory interface at 192-bit versus the R7 M465's 64-bit, which is a major factor in its bandwidth advantage.

Clock behavior also differs. The Quadro K4000 has no listed base or boost clock, but its memory runs at 1404 MHz (5.6 Gbps effective). The R7 M465 has a base clock of 730 MHz and a boost clock of 1024 MHz, with memory at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective). The R7 M465's boost clock allows it to scale performance dynamically, while the Quadro appears to run at a fixed rate. Neither GPU has RT or tensor cores.

Feature support diverges on API levels. The R7 M465 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), a full implementation, while the Quadro K4000 only supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan versions differ slightly: the Quadro supports 1.2.175, and the R7 M465 supports 1.2.170. The Quadro K4000 uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the R7 M465 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, which gives the AMD part a potential bandwidth advantage per lane despite the narrower interface.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA Quadro K4000 wins on raw compute and memory bandwidth. In the head-to-head Geekbench OpenCL test, it beats the R7 M465 by 16.7%. Its FP32 output of 1,244.2 GFLOPS is 58% higher than the R7 M465's 786.4 GFLOPS. The memory bandwidth gap is even more pronounced: 134.8 GB/s versus 36.00 GB/s, a 3.7x difference. This makes the Quadro the clear winner for tasks like large data set processing, texture-heavy workloads, or any OpenCL compute that is memory-bound. The Quadro's 3 GB VRAM also allows it to hold larger working sets than the R7 M465's 2 GB.

AMD Radeon R7 M465 wins on architectural modernity and efficiency. It is a newer design, released in 2016 versus 2013 for the Quadro. Its GCN 3.0 architecture is more advanced than Kepler, and it supports full DirectX 12 (12_0), which is a significant advantage for modern games and applications. The R7 M465 also has FP16 support at 1:1 ratio, meaning it can process half-precision data at the same rate as FP32. This is a feature the Quadro lacks entirely. The R7 M465's lack of a listed TDP and power connectors suggests it draws less power and requires no supplemental power, making it easier to integrate into compact systems.

The R7 M465 also wins on bus interface modernity. It uses PCIe 3.0 x8, which offers higher per-lane bandwidth than the Quadro's PCIe 2.0 x16. While the Quadro has more lanes, the newer standard may reduce bottlenecks for data transfer in systems that support it. The R7 M465's smaller die size (125 mm² vs 221 mm²) and lower transistor count (1,550 million vs 2,540 million) indicate a more power-efficient design, which is a plus for battery-powered devices.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 has an average benchmark score of 5982, while the AMD Radeon R7 M465 has a score of 5841. The Quadro K4000 also holds a higher percentile rank at 34 versus 33 for the R7 M465.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare between the two?

A: The Quadro K4000 offers 134.8 GB/s of bandwidth, while the R7 M465 offers 36.00 GB/s. The Quadro's advantage is approximately 3.7 times the R7 M465's bandwidth.

Q: What is the difference in DirectX support?

A: The R7 M465 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), which is the full feature level. The Quadro K4000 only supports DirectX 12 (11_0), which is a lower feature level. This gives the AMD part a clear edge for running modern DirectX 12 titles.

Q: Does the R7 M465 have any advantage in half-precision compute?

A: Yes. The R7 M465 has an FP16 performance of 786.4 GFLOPS, which is a 1:1 ratio to its FP32 performance. The Quadro K4000 has no listed FP16 capability, meaning it likely lacks this feature.

Q: Which GPU has a larger memory capacity?

A: The Quadro K4000 has 3 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the R7 M465 has 2 GB. The Quadro also uses a wider memory bus (192-bit vs 64-bit).

Q: What is the release date difference?

A: The Quadro K4000 was released on February 28, 2013, while the R7 M465 was released on May 14, 2016. The R7 M465 is over three years newer.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 wins decisively. The Quadro K4000 scores 6816 points, while the AMD Radeon R7 M465 scores 5841 points. This represents a delta of 16.7% in favor of the Quadro. This is not a marginal victory; it is a substantial lead that indicates the Quadro's Kepler architecture, despite being older, is significantly better optimized for OpenCL compute workloads.

The Quadro's advantage in this test can be attributed to its hardware specifications. With 768 shading units compared to the R7 M465's 384, the Quadro has double the compute cores. Its FP32 output of 1,244.2 GFLOPS is also nearly 58% higher. Furthermore, the Quadro's memory subsystem is vastly superior. The 192-bit bus and 134.8 GB/s bandwidth allow it to feed its compute units much faster than the R7 M465's 64-bit bus and 36.00 GB/s. For OpenCL, which is often memory-intensive, this is a critical advantage.

The R7 M465 has no wins in the head-to-head benchmarks, as the data shows only one test and the AMD part lost. However, that does not mean it is a poor GPU. Its score of 5841 in Geekbench OpenCL places it at the 33rd percentile, only one point below the Quadro's 34th percentile. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R5 M435, scores 5859, which is just 0.3% higher. This shows the R7 M465 is competitive within its own class, but it simply cannot match the Quadro's peak compute throughput.

The delta of 16.7% in the head-to-head test is the single most important piece of performance data. It confirms that for any user looking at raw OpenCL compute, the Quadro K4000 is the superior choice. The R7 M465 would need to rely on other features, like modern API support, to justify a purchase decision.

Specification Differences

The specifications below highlight the key differences between the two GPUs, focusing only on fields where they diverge.

• Chip: NVIDIA Quadro K4000 uses GK106; AMD Radeon R7 M465 uses Topaz.
• Architecture: Quadro K4000 is Kepler; R7 M465 is GCN 3.0.
• Generation: Quadro K4000 is Quadro Kepler (Kx000); R7 M465 is Gem System (R7 M400).
• Transistors: Quadro K4000 has 2,540 million; R7 M465 has 1,550 million.
• Die Size: Quadro K4000 is 221 mm²; R7 M465 is 125 mm².
• Transistor Density: Quadro K4000 is 11.5M / mm²; R7 M465 is 12.4M / mm².
• Base Clock: Quadro K4000 has none listed; R7 M465 has 730 MHz.
• Boost Clock: Quadro K4000 has none listed; R7 M465 has 1024 MHz.
• Memory Clock: Quadro K4000 is 1404 MHz (5.6 Gbps effective); R7 M465 is 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective).
• Memory Size: Quadro K4000 has 3 GB; R7 M465 has 2 GB.
• Memory Bus Width: Quadro K4000 is 192 bit; R7 M465 is 64 bit.
• Memory Bandwidth: Quadro K4000 is 134.8 GB/s; R7 M465 is 36.00 GB/s.
• Shading Units: Quadro K4000 has 768; R7 M465 has 384.
• TMUs: Quadro K4000 has 64; R7 M465 has 24.
• ROPs: Quadro K4000 has 24; R7 M465 has 8.
• Pixel Rate: Quadro K4000 is 12.96 GPixel/s; R7 M465 is 8.192 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: Quadro K4000 is 51.84 GTexel/s; R7 M465 is 24.58 GTexel/s.
• FP32: Quadro K4000 is 1,244.2 GFLOPS; R7 M465 is 786.4 GFLOPS.
• FP16: Quadro K4000 has none listed; R7 M465 has 786.4 GFLOPS (1:1).
• TDP: Quadro K4000 is 80 W; R7 M465 has none listed.
• Slot Width: Quadro K4000 is Single-slot; R7 M465 has none listed.
• Power Connectors: Quadro K4000 is 1x 6-pin; R7 M465 has none listed.
• Suggested PSU: Quadro K4000 is 250 W; R7 M465 has none listed.
• Bus Interface: Quadro K4000 is PCIe 2.0 x16; R7 M465 is PCIe 3.0 x8.
• Display Outputs: Quadro K4000 is 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2; R7 M465 has none listed.
• DirectX Support: Quadro K4000 is 12 (11_0); R7 M465 is 12 (12_0).
• Vulkan Support: Quadro K4000 is 1.2.175; R7 M465 is 1.2.170.
• Dimensions: Quadro K4000 is 241 mm (9.5 inches) long and 111 mm (4.4 inches) high; R7 M465 has no listed dimensions.
• Release Date: Quadro K4000 is 2013-02-28; R7 M465 is 2016-05-14.
• Predecessor: Quadro K4000 is Quadro Fermi; R7 M465 is Solar System.
• Successor: Quadro K4000 is Quadro Maxwell; R7 M465 is Polaris Mobile.
• Launch MSRP: Quadro K4000 is 1,269 USD; R7 M465 has none listed.