AMD Radeon RX 550 vs NVIDIA Quadro P4000 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split is entirely one-sided. The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 wins every head-to-head test recorded in the database, and the margins are substantial. The AMD Radeon RX 550 does not claim a single victory across the shared workloads, which makes the use-case separation unusually clear.

The Quadro P4000 is built for serious compute and professional graphics. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 36,212 versus the RX 550's 11,063 shows a 69.4% lead in raw compute throughput. That gap matters for GPU-accelerated tasks like rendering, simulation, and data processing where OpenCL is the primary API. The Vulkan score tells a similar story: 41,786 for the Quadro against 12,270 for the Radeon, a 70.6% advantage. Vulkan is increasingly common in professional visualization and CAD viewports, so this is not a niche metric.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result is the most lopsided of all. The Quadro P4000 scores 1,115 while the RX 550 manages only 127, an 88.6% deficit for the AMD card. This is a modern DirectX 12 workload, and the RX 550 simply lacks the hardware resources to keep pace. Any application that leans on DX12 features, whether gaming or professional DCC tools, will heavily favor the NVIDIA card.

For the RX 550, its wins are not about raw performance but about fit. It is a low-power, compact card with no auxiliary power connector, and it targets light desktop use cases. The database shows it sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, while the Quadro P4000 is at the 47th percentile. That percentile difference is small, but the average benchmark scores tell a more nuanced story: the RX 550 averages 11,075 across its recorded tests, while the Quadro averages 9,665. This is because the RX 550's benchmark set skews toward compute-oriented tests where it performs relatively better, while the Quadro's set includes older DirectX 9/10/11 passmark tests where it scores low (66, 86, and 181 respectively). The RX 550 wins on Geekbench Metal (20,838) if you care about Apple's API, but that is not relevant to a Windows workstation comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different foundries and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon RX 550 uses the Lexa chip built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process. It packs 2,200 million transistors into a 103 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 21.4 million per mm². The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 uses the GP104 chip on TSMC's 16 nm node, with 7,200 million transistors across a 314 mm² die, a density of 22.9 million per mm². The Quadro's die is three times larger and carries more than three times the transistor count, which explains most of its performance advantage.

The RX 550 is GCN 4.0 architecture, part of the Polaris generation. It has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The Quadro P4000 is Pascal architecture with 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. That is 3.5 times the shader count, 3.5 times the TMUs, and 4 times the ROPs. The pixel rate difference is stark: 94.72 GPixel/s for the Quadro versus 18.93 GPixel/s for the Radeon. Texture rate is 165.8 GTexel/s versus 37.86 GTexel/s.

Memory is another major divergence. The RX 550 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro P4000 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, with 243.3 GB/s. That is double the bus width and over double the bandwidth, plus four times the capacity. For large datasets and multi-application workflows, the Quadro's memory subsystem is a practical necessity, not just a spec sheet advantage.

FP32 compute is listed at 1,211.4 GFLOPS for the RX 550 and 5.304 TFLOPS for the Quadro, a 4.4x difference. The RX 550 has a 1:1 FP16 ratio, meaning it does not accelerate half-precision separately. The Quadro runs FP16 at 1:64, which means it is primarily a FP32-oriented chip. Neither card has dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, so both rely on traditional shader hardware.

The bus interface differs too: the RX 550 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the Quadro uses PCIe 3.0 x16. For most workloads the x8 link is not a bottleneck, but bandwidth-heavy tasks like data transfer to VRAM or certain compute kernels can benefit from the wider link.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The shared test suite contains three workloads, and the Quadro P4000 wins all three by wide margins.

In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the Quadro scores 1,115 against the RX 550's 127. The delta is 88.6% in favor of NVIDIA. This is a modern synthetic workload that stresses geometry, shading, and memory bandwidth. The RX 550's 16 ROPs and 112 GB/s bandwidth are simply insufficient for this level of rendering demand.

Geekbench OpenCL shows the Quadro at 36,212 versus 11,063 for the Radeon. The delta is 69.4%. OpenCL is a common target for professional compute, and the Quadro's 1,792 shaders and 243.3 GB/s memory bandwidth translate directly into higher throughput. The RX 550's 512 shaders are a fraction of what is needed for serious compute tasks.

Geekbench Vulkan follows the same pattern: 41,786 for the Quadro, 12,270 for the Radeon, a 70.6% delta. Vulkan is increasingly used in CAD, DCC, and game engines, so this result reinforces the Quadro's suitability for modern professional applications.

The RX 550 does not appear in the Passmark suite within the head-to-head comparison, but the Quadro's individual Passmark scores are informative. It scores 11,466 in Passmark G3D and 4,913 in GPU Compute, but only 66 in DirectX 10, 86 in DirectX 11, 40 in DirectX 12, and 181 in DirectX 9. These low legacy scores are odd for a card of this class, and they drag its average down. The G2D score of 786 is modest. The RX 550's benchmark set does not include Passmark, so direct comparison there is not possible.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the choice is straightforward. If your work involves OpenCL compute, Vulkan rendering, or modern DX12 workloads, the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 is the only defensible pick. It leads by 69% to 89% across all shared benchmarks, and its 8 GB memory and 256-bit bus make it viable for datasets that would choke the RX 550's 2 GB frame buffer.

The AMD Radeon RX 550 is not a competitor in this class. It is a low-power card with a 50 W TDP and no power connector, designed for basic display output and light 2D work. Its average benchmark score of 11,075 is actually higher than the Quadro's 9,665, but that is an artifact of different test sets. The RX 550's Geekbench Metal score of 20,838 is its strongest result, but Metal is Apple-specific and irrelevant for a PCIe workstation card.

Who should buy the RX 550? Someone who needs a simple, quiet, low-profile card for a basic desktop, with no compute requirements beyond casual use. Who should buy the Quadro P4000? Anyone running professional applications that use OpenCL, Vulkan, or DX12, or anyone who needs more than 2 GB of VRAM. The Quadro's 105 W TDP and single 6-pin connector are modest, and its single-slot design fits tighter chassis.

The percentile rankings are close (50th vs 47th), but that masks the real performance gap. The RX 550's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q (within 0.1%), the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER (0.3% ahead), and the AMD FirePro W4300 (1.3% ahead). The Quadro's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 (0.1% ahead), the GeForce GTX 960M (0.2% ahead), and the Quadro K5000 (0.3% ahead). Neither card is top-tier by modern standards, but the Quadro is in a different performance class.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 scores 36,212 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 69.4% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 550's 11,063.

Q: Can the RX 550 handle modern DirectX 12 games?

A: The data suggests no. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RX 550 scores 127 versus 1,115 for the Quadro P4000, an 88.6% deficit. The RX 550 is not designed for demanding DX12 workloads.

Q: How much VRAM do these cards have?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 550 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA Quadro P4000 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 243.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do either cards support ray tracing?

A: No. Both cards list no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. They are traditional rasterization and compute GPUs.

Q: Which card is better for Vulkan applications?

A: The Quadro P4000 is significantly better. Its Geekbench Vulkan score is 41,786 versus 12,270 for the RX 550, a 70.6% advantage.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The RX 550 has a 50 W TDP with no power connector and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Quadro P4000 has a 105 W TDP with one 6-pin connector and a suggested PSU of 300 W.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 550 | NVIDIA Quadro P4000 |

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

| Chip | Lexa | GP104 |

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Pascal |

| Process Node | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) | 16 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 2,200 million | 7,200 million |

| Die Size | 103 mm² | 314 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1100 MHz | 1202 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1183 MHz | 1480 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) | 1901 MHz (7.6 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB GDDR5 | 8 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 243.3 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 1792 |

| TMUs | 32 | 112 |

| ROPs | 16 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 18.93 GPixel/s | 94.72 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 37.86 GTexel/s | 165.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Compute | 1,211.4 GFLOPS | 5.304 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Compute | 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1) | 82.88 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | 50 W | 105 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Length | 145 mm (5.7 inches) | 241 mm (9.5 inches) |

| Height | Not listed | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Release Date | 2017-04-19 | 2017-02-05 |

| Launch MSRP | 79 USD | 815 USD |