AMD Radeon R9 M390X vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon R9 M390X compare to the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 in overall benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M390X has an average benchmark score of 20,662, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 averages 17,789. The R9 M390X sits at the 66th percentile of all GPUs, whereas the Quadro RTX 4000 sits at the 61st percentile.

Q: Which GPU wins in the Vulkan benchmark, and by how much?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 78,844 against the AMD Radeon R9 M390X's 16,951. The delta is 78.5% in favor of the NVIDIA card.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M390X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 416.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the transistor count and die size difference?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M390X has 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 has 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die. Transistor density is 13.7M per mm² for AMD and 25.0M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each GPU in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M390X's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (0.2% behind), Intel Arc A750 (0.4% ahead), Intel Arc B570 (0.5% ahead), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (0.6% ahead). The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 7790 (0.7% ahead), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (0.9% ahead), AMD Radeon 780M (1.1% ahead), and AMD Radeon Pro 560 (1.4% ahead).

Q: What is the release date and production status of each card?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M390X was released on 2015-05-04 and is end-of-life. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 was released on 2018-11-12 and is also end-of-life.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split. The AMD Radeon R9 M390X holds a higher average benchmark score at 20,662 versus 17,789 for the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000, and it ranks higher in the overall percentile (66th vs 61st). However, the single head-to-head benchmark available shows the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 dominating in Vulkan performance with a 78.5% lead.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput and higher average scores across the database, the AMD Radeon R9 M390X is the better pick. Its average score places it just 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Arc A750, indicating competitive standing against modern mid-range parts.

For users focusing on modern API performance, specifically Vulkan, the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 is the clear choice. The 78,844 Vulkan score dwarfs the R9 M390X's 16,951, and the Quadro also brings dedicated RT cores and tensor cores that the AMD card lacks entirely.

The R9 M390X suits legacy workloads and lighter tasks where its 75 W power draw is sufficient. The Quadro RTX 4000, with its 160 W TDP and 450 W suggested PSU, fits workstations needing sustained professional rendering, particularly in Vulkan-based environments.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records only one head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench Vulkan. In this test, the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 scores 78,844, while the AMD Radeon R9 M390X scores 16,951. The delta percentage is 78.5%, meaning the NVIDIA card outperforms the AMD card by over four and a half times in Vulkan compute.

This is a decisive win for NVIDIA. The Quadro RTX 4000's Vulkan score is nearly five times higher, reflecting its Turing architecture's strengths in modern API workloads. The R9 M390X, based on GCN 3.0, lags significantly in this metric.

Beyond this single direct comparison, the average benchmark scores tell a different story. The R9 M390X's 20,662 average is 14% higher than the Quadro RTX 4000's 17,789. This discrepancy suggests the AMD card performs better across a broader set of legacy and mixed workloads, while the NVIDIA card excels specifically in Vulkan.

The R9 M390X's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT, has an average score of 20,713, placing the AMD card just 0.2% behind. The Quadro RTX 4000's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon HD 7790, averages 17,666, a 0.7% gap. These figures contextualize each card's standing within their respective performance tiers.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ fundamentally in nearly every measurable specification. The AMD Radeon R9 M390X uses a 28 nm process node from TSMC, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 uses a 12 nm process from the same foundry. Transistor counts stand at 5,000 million for AMD and 13,600 million for NVIDIA, with die sizes of 366 mm² and 545 mm² respectively.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The R9 M390X offers 4 GB of GDDR5 at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro RTX 4000 provides 8 GB of GDDR6 at 1625 MHz (13 Gbps effective) with 416.0 GB/s bandwidth. Both use a 256-bit bus.

Core counts differ as well. The AMD card has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The NVIDIA card has 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Critically, the Quadro RTX 4000 includes 36 RT cores and 288 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the R9 M390X.

Clock speeds are only partially specified for the AMD card, which lacks base and boost clock data. The Quadro RTX 4000 operates at a 1005 MHz base and 1545 MHz boost. Pixel rates are 23.14 GPixel/s for AMD versus 98.88 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rates are 92.54 GTexel/s versus 222.5 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 2.961 TFLOPS versus 7.119 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 2.961 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 14.24 TFLOPS (2:1).

Power and physical specifications also differ. The R9 M390X draws 75 W with an MXM Module slot and no power connectors. The Quadro RTX 4000 draws 160 W with a single 8-pin connector, a 450 W suggested PSU, and a single-slot design measuring 241 mm (9.5 inches) in length and 111 mm (4.4 inches) in height.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R9 M390X is built on the GCN 3.0 architecture with the Amethyst chip, part of the Gem System (R9 M300) generation. Its predecessor was Solar System, and its successor is Polaris Mobile. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 uses the Turing architecture with the TU104 chip, part of the Quadro Turing (Tx000) generation. Its predecessor was Quadro Volta, and its successor is Workstation Ampere.

The process node difference is significant: 28 nm for AMD versus 12 nm for NVIDIA, both from TSMC. This accounts for the transistor density gap, 13.7M per mm² versus 25.0M per mm². The NVIDIA card packs nearly three times the transistors into a die that is only 49% larger.

API support reveals another architectural divide. The R9 M390X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Quadro RTX 4000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The newer Vulkan version and DirectX 12 Ultimate designation reflect Turing's more modern feature set.

Display outputs also differ. The R9 M390X has portable device dependent outputs, while the Quadro RTX 4000 offers 3x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 for both.

The presence of RT cores and tensor cores in the Quadro RTX 4000 marks the most substantive architectural difference. These dedicated units enable hardware ray tracing and AI acceleration, capabilities entirely missing from the GCN 3.0-based AMD card.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R9 M390X wins in average benchmark performance. Its 20,662 average score exceeds the Quadro RTX 4000's 17,789 by roughly 14%. This places the AMD card at a higher percentile (66th vs 61st) and closer to modern mid-range rivals like the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (0.2% gap) and Intel Arc A750 (0.4% lead). For users running mixed workloads or legacy applications, the R9 M390X appears more consistent.

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 wins decisively in Vulkan performance. Its 78,844 score versus 16,951 represents a 78.5% advantage. The card also leads in raw throughput metrics: 7.119 TFLOPS FP32 versus 2.961 TFLOPS, 416.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 160.0 GB/s, and 98.88 GPixel/s versus 23.14 GPixel/s. These figures indicate superiority in memory-intensive and compute-heavy tasks.

The Quadro RTX 4000 also holds advantages in memory capacity (8 GB vs 4 GB) and supports hardware ray tracing and tensor operations through its RT and tensor cores. This makes it the choice for modern professional workloads, particularly those leveraging Vulkan or requiring AI acceleration.

The R9 M390X wins on power efficiency. Its 75 W TDP is less than half the Quadro RTX 4000's 160 W, making it suitable for portable or low-power systems. The MXM Module form factor reinforces this mobile-oriented design.

For use-case selection, the data suggests the R9 M390X for legacy compatibility and power-constrained environments, while the Quadro RTX 4000 for modern API performance and professional rendering tasks. The single head-to-head Vulkan benchmark heavily favors NVIDIA, but the average scores favor AMD, creating a nuanced trade-off depending on workload priorities.