AMD Radeon R9 M275X vs NVIDIA Quadro K4200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear overall win for the NVIDIA Quadro K4200, which takes both head-to-head benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro K4200 scores 12,313 against the AMD Radeon R9 M275X's 11,200, a lead of 9.9%. The gap widens substantially in Geekbench Vulkan, where the Quadro K4200 scores 12,482 versus 9,964 for the Radeon, a 25.3% advantage. That Vulkan result is the single largest margin in this comparison, and it signals a significant difference in how the two cards handle modern compute workloads.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the head-to-head picture. The Quadro K4200 averages 12,398 across its recorded tests, while the Radeon R9 M275X averages 10,582. That places the Quadro K4200 in the 52nd percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Radeon sits in the 49th percentile. Neither card is near the top of the overall rankings, but the Quadro maintains a consistent edge.

Context from the nearest rivals helps interpret these numbers. The Quadro K4200's average score trails the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm by only 1.8%, and it sits 2.5% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT and 2.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670. It beats the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A by 3.3%. The Radeon R9 M275X, by contrast, sits within a tight cluster: it is 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6600S, 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 550X, 1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti, and 1.7% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K2200. In short, the Quadro K4200 competes with a slightly higher tier of GPUs than the Radeon, and its benchmark results place it accordingly.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural lineages. The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 uses the GK104 chip built on the Kepler architecture, part of the Quadro Kepler (Kx200) generation. The AMD Radeon R9 M275X uses the Venus chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, part of the Gem System (R9 M200) generation. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process, and their transistor densities are nearly identical: 12.0M per mm² for the Quadro, 12.2M per mm² for the Radeon.

The transistor budgets differ greatly, though. The Quadro K4200 packs 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The Radeon R9 M275X has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. That is a 136% larger die for the Quadro, and the extra silicon shows up in every major compute block. The Quadro has 1,344 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The Radeon has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. In every category, the Quadro has more than double the resources of the Radeon.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The Radeon runs at a 900 MHz base clock and 925 MHz boost, while the Quadro runs at 771 MHz base and 784 MHz boost. The Radeon's higher clocks help narrow the gap in raw throughput, but they do not close it. The Quadro's pixel rate is 21.95 GPixel/s versus 14.80 GPixel/s for the Radeon, and its texture rate is 87.81 GTexel/s versus 37.00 GTexel/s. In FP32 compute, the Quadro delivers 2.107 TFLOPS against 1,184.0 GFLOPS for the Radeon. The Quadro's advantage is roughly 78% in FP32, a direct consequence of its larger shading array.

Memory configurations also diverge. The Quadro K4200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus, yielding 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R9 M275X has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus, yielding 72.00 GB/s. The Quadro's memory clock is 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective) versus 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) for the Radeon. Both the bus width and the memory clock favor the Quadro, giving it more than double the bandwidth of the Radeon.

API support is similar but not identical. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6. The Quadro lists DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the Radeon lists DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Radeon has a slightly higher DirectX feature level, while the Quadro has a marginally newer Vulkan version. In practice, the Vulkan benchmark gap of 25.3% suggests the Quadro's implementation translates better into real-world performance despite the Radeon's newer feature-level listing.

Interface and power characteristics also differ. The Quadro uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the Radeon uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The Quadro has a 108 W TDP, a single-slot design, and a 1x 6-pin power connector, with a 300 W suggested power supply. The Radeon's TDP, power connector, and slot width are not recorded in the database, so no direct power comparison is possible from the available data.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro K4200 wins both recorded benchmarks, so the use-case split is heavily lopsided. In OpenCL workloads, the Quadro leads by 9.9%, and in Vulkan workloads it leads by 25.3%. The database shows 2 wins for the Quadro and 0 for the Radeon.

The Radeon's higher clock speeds (900 MHz base versus 771 MHz) and its PCIe 3.0 interface are the only recorded areas where it holds a specification advantage. For workloads sensitive to clock frequency or bus interface generation, the Radeon may narrow the gap, but no benchmark in the database confirms this. The OpenCL result shows the Radeon within 9.9% of the Quadro, which is closer than the Vulkan result, so OpenCL-class workloads appear to be the Radeon's relatively stronger territory. The Vulkan result, on the other hand, is a decisive Quadro victory.

For users prioritizing compute performance in either OpenCL or Vulkan, the Quadro is the clear pick. For users who value a smaller die, lower transistor count, and higher base clocks, the Radeon is more economical in silicon terms, but the database does not record any performance test where that translates into a win.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 averages 12,398 across its recorded tests, compared to 10,582 for the AMD Radeon R9 M275X.

Q: How large is the Quadro K4200's lead in Vulkan?

A: The Quadro K4200 scores 12,482 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 9,964 for the Radeon R9 M275X, a 25.3% difference.

Q: Does the Radeon have any performance advantage in the recorded data?

A: No. The Radeon R9 M275X loses both head-to-head tests, with 0 wins recorded. Its higher base clock of 900 MHz does not translate into a benchmark victory.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro K4200 has 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth on a 256 bit bus, while the Radeon R9 M275X has 72.00 GB/s on a 128 bit bus.

Q: What are the transistor counts for each card?

A: The Quadro K4200 has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the Radeon R9 M275X has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The Quadro K4200 has 1,344 shading units, while the Radeon R9 M275X has 640 shading units.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro K4200 | AMD Radeon R9 M275X |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Chip | GK104 | Venus |

| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |

| Generation | Quadro Kepler (Kx200) | Gem System (R9 M200) |

| Transistors | 3,540 million | 1,500 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.0M / mm² | 12.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 771 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 784 MHz | 925 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective) | 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 172.8 GB/s | 72.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1344 | 640 |

| TMUs | 112 | 40 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 21.95 GPixel/s | 14.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 87.81 GTexel/s | 37.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.107 TFLOPS | 1,184.0 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 108 W | Not recorded |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Not recorded |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | Not recorded |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | Not recorded |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 | Not recorded |

| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.2.170 |

| Dimensions | 241 mm (9.5 inches) long, 111 mm (4.4 inches) high | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2014-07-21 | 2014-01-27 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Fermi | Solar System |

| Successor | Quadro Maxwell | Polaris Mobile |

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: the NVIDIA Quadro K4200 is the stronger GPU in this pairing. It wins both recorded benchmarks, holds a 9.9% lead in OpenCL and a 25.3% lead in Vulkan, and its average score of 12,398 sits a full 17.2% above the Radeon's 10,582. Its larger shader array, wider memory bus, and greater bandwidth all align with the benchmark results.

The AMD Radeon R9 M275X is not without merits. Its higher base and boost clocks (900 MHz and 925 MHz versus 771 MHz and 784 MHz) and its PCIe 3.0 interface are meaningful specification advantages. It also uses a much smaller die (123 mm² versus 294 mm²) and far fewer transistors (1,500 million versus 3,540 million). For systems where silicon footprint and power draw are primary concerns, the Radeon is the leaner option, though its TDP is not recorded in the database.

For buyers choosing between these two end-of-life cards strictly on performance, the Quadro K4200 is the pick. It wins every test in the database and competes in a higher performance tier. The Radeon R9 M275X is the choice only for those who specifically need its higher clocks, PCIe 3.0 support, or smaller die, and who are willing to accept a measurable performance deficit in both OpenCL and Vulkan workloads.