AMD Radeon R9 M265X vs NVIDIA Quadro P4000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 and AMD Radeon R9 M265X are two end-of-life graphics cards from different eras and market segments. The data shows a substantial performance gulf between them, with the Quadro P4000 leading in the only shared benchmark and demonstrating a significantly higher average score. This analysis will break down the benchmark results, architectural differences, and practical implications based solely on the provided specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available between these two GPUs is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this benchmark, the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 scores 36,212 points, while the AMD Radeon R9 M265X manages 8,851 points. This represents a delta of 309.1% in favor of the Quadro P4000, meaning it delivers roughly four times the raw compute performance of the Radeon R9 M265X in this specific workload. This is not a marginal victory but a dominant one, reflecting the fundamental generational and market-tier differences between the two products.

Looking at the broader benchmark picture, the Quadro P4000 has a much more extensive test suite. It participates in ten different benchmarks, including 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), Passmark's DirectX 9/10/11/12 tests, Passmark G2D, G3D, and GPU Compute tests, and a Vulkan test. Its scores range from a high of 41,786 in Geekbench Vulkan to a low of 40 in Passmark DirectX 12. In contrast, the Radeon R9 M265X has only one recorded benchmark result, the Geekbench OpenCL score. This lack of data points makes a comprehensive head-to-head comparison impossible, but the single available data point is conclusive about the performance hierarchy.

The average benchmark score further underscores this divide. The Quadro P4000 has an average score of 9,665 across its ten benchmarks. The Radeon R9 M265X, with only its single Geekbench OpenCL score, has an average of 8,851. While the average score for the R9 M265X is based on a single result, the Quadro P4000's average is dragged down by its very low Passmark DirectX scores (40, 66, 86). Even with those low DirectX results, its average remains higher than the R9 M265X's only score. The Quadro P4000 also sits in the 47th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the R9 M265X's 44th percentile, indicating that the Quadro P4000 outperforms a slightly larger percentage of the overall GPU landscape.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the data, the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 wins in every measurable category. It has a 100% win rate in the head-to-head benchmarks (1 win, 0 losses). Its strengths are most apparent in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where it scores 41,786, and the Geekbench OpenCL test, where it scores 36,212. These high compute scores suggest it is well-suited for general-purpose GPU computing tasks and applications that leverage the Vulkan API. In the Passmark G3D suite, it scores 11,466, which is a indicator of its strong overall 3D rendering capability.

The AMD Radeon R9 M265X has zero benchmark wins against the Quadro P4000. Its single Geekbench OpenCL score of 8,851 is its only recorded performance data point. While its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (with an average score of 8,863, a delta of -0.1%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8,746, a delta of 1.2%), these rivals are all similar in performance to the R9 M265X, not the Quadro P4000. The data does not provide any benchmark where the Radeon R9 M265X is competitive with or superior to the Quadro P4000.

The Quadro P4000's nearest rivals, including the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 (average 9,653, delta 0.1%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M (average 9,645, delta 0.2%), are all much closer to its own average score of 9,665. This places the Quadro P4000 in a completely different performance class than the R9 M265X, which is closer to cards like the Radeon Pro WX 5100 and the GTX 460 v2.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 is significantly faster, scoring 36,212 compared to the AMD Radeon R9 M265X's 8,851. This is a 309.1% difference in favor of the Quadro P4000.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 has an average benchmark score of 9,665. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X has an average benchmark score of 8,851, which is based on its single Geekbench OpenCL result.

Q: How do these cards compare in their overall performance percentile?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 is in the 47th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon R9 M265X is in the 44th percentile. This indicates the Quadro P4000 is a slightly better performer relative to the entire GPU market.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R9 M265X have any winning benchmark results against the Quadro P4000?

A: No. In the head-to-head comparison data, the Quadro P4000 has 1 win and the Radeon R9 M265X has 0 wins. The only shared benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, is won decisively by the Quadro P4000.

Q: What are the closest rivals to the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 in terms of average score?

A: The closest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 (average 9,653, delta 0.1%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M (average 9,645, delta 0.2%), and the NVIDIA Quadro K5000 (average 9,637, delta 0.3%).

Q: What are the closest rivals to the AMD Radeon R9 M265X in terms of average score?

A: The closest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (average 8,863, delta -0.1%), the AMD Radeon 550X (average 8,918, delta -0.8%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (average 8,746, delta 1.2%).

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for these two GPUs reveal stark contrasts across nearly every component. The most immediate difference is memory configuration. The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 features 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 243.3 GB/s. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X, in contrast, has only 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding a much lower 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth.

The core configurations are equally divergent. The Quadro P4000 has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs). The R9 M265X has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. This disparity in core counts directly explains the massive performance gap in compute and rendering tasks. Clock speeds also differ, with the Quadro P4000 running at a base of 1202 MHz and a boost of 1480 MHz, while the R9 M265X has a base clock of 575 MHz and a boost of 625 MHz.

The manufacturing process is another clear separator. The Quadro P4000 is built on a 16 nm process at TSMC, while the R9 M265X uses an older 28 nm process, also at TSMC. This translates to a significant difference in transistor density, with the Quadro P4000 at 22.9M transistors per mm² and the R9 M265X at 12.2M per mm². The Quadro P4000 also has a much larger die (314 mm²) and transistor count (7,200 million) compared to the R9 M265X (123 mm² and 1,500 million). The Quadro P4000 has a TDP of 105 W, a single-slot form factor, and a 1x 6-pin power connector, while the R9 M265X has no listed TDP, slot width, or power connector requirements.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two cards is foundational. The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 is based on the Pascal architecture, using the GP104 chip, and belongs to the Quadro Pascal (Px000) generation. It was released on 2017-02-05 and its predecessor is Quadro Maxwell, with its successor being Quadro Volta. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The card also features a pixel rate of 94.72 GPixel/s, a texture rate of 165.8 GTexel/s, and an FP32 performance of 5.304 TFLOPS. Its FP16 performance is listed as 82.88 GFLOPS (1:64), indicating a very limited half-precision rate.

The AMD Radeon R9 M265X is built on the much older GCN 1.0 architecture, using the Venus chip, and belongs to the Gem System (R9 M200) generation. It was released on 2014-03-20 and its predecessor is Solar System, with its successor being Polaris Mobile. It supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Its pixel rate is 10.00 GPixel/s, its texture rate is 25.00 GTexel/s, and its FP32 performance is 800.0 GFLOPS. Notably, the R9 M265X has no listed FP16 performance data.

The difference in FP32 compute is stark: 5.304 TFLOPS for the Quadro P4000 versus 800.0 GFLOPS for the R9 M265X. This, combined with the newer architecture and higher clocks, makes the Quadro P4000 a far more capable compute device. The display outputs also differ, with the Quadro P4000 offering 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the R9 M265X has no display outputs listed.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 is in a completely different performance tier than the AMD Radeon R9 M265X. With a 309.1% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, a higher average score (9,665 vs 8,851), and a higher performance percentile (47th vs 44th), the Quadro P4000 is the superior GPU in every measurable way. Its larger memory pool, wider memory bus, more numerous shading units, and more modern architecture all contribute to this commanding lead.

The choice between these two cards, therefore, is not a matter of performance trade-offs but of absolute capability. Users who require a GPU for demanding tasks like 3D rendering, professional visualization, or compute workloads should choose the NVIDIA Quadro P4000. Its 8 GB of memory and high FP32 throughput make it a far more suitable option for such applications. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X, with its single benchmark score and significantly lower specifications, is simply outclassed. Based on the available data, there is no workload where the R9 M265X would be the recommended choice over the Quadro P4000, save for scenarios where a specific software requirement is incompatible with the newer architecture. The Quadro P4000's launch MSRP was 815 USD, which is a data point for historical reference. For anyone comparing these two, the Quadro P4000 is the clear and only logical choice from a performance standpoint.