AMD Radeon RX 6400 vs NVIDIA Quadro K3100M Comparison

# AMD Radeon RX 6400 vs NVIDIA Quadro K3100M

The benchmark database positions the AMD Radeon RX 6400 as the decisive winner in this comparison. Across the recorded head-to-head tests, the RX 6400 takes both wins, with margins that are unusually large. The Quadro K3100M is slower in every recorded workload, and in some tests the gap exceeds 400%. This is not a close contest; the data points to a clear generational and architectural advantage for the AMD part.

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is the clear choice in this pairing. The database shows it winning every head-to-head benchmark, and the margins are not small. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 6400 scores 32,011 against the Quadro K3100M’s 6,154, a 420.2% advantage. The Vulkan result repeats the pattern: 16,372 versus 5,484, a 198.5% lead. The data is unambiguous. The Quadro K3100M, despite being a professional mobile part, cannot keep pace with the modern RDNA 2 architecture. For any workload captured in the database, the AMD part is the recommended pick.

Architecture Differences

The two parts come from different design eras. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is built on the Navi 24 chip using the RDNA 2.0 architecture, a modern design with 5,400 million transistors on a 107 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 50.5 million per mm². It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. In contrast, the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M uses the GK104 chip, a Kepler architecture part with 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The older 28 nm process at TSMC gives a density of 12.0 million transistors per mm². The RX 6400 is the newer and denser design by a wide margin.

The AMD part also brings a different set of compute resources. The RX 6400 has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. It does not have tensor cores. The K3100M has 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores. The RX 6400’s ray tracing support is the key architectural extra.

FAQ

Q: Does the RX 6400 support newer API versions?

A: Yes. The AMD part lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. The Quadro K3100M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Q: Which card has the higher memory bandwidth?

A: The RX 6400 has a smaller 64-bit memory bus with GDDR6 memory running at an effective 16 Gbps, producing 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The K3100M uses a 256-bit bus with GDDR5 at an effective 3.2 Gbps, for 102.4 GB/s. The AMD card’s bandwidth is 25.0% higher.

Q: What is the pixel and texture performance?

A: The RX 6400 records a pixel rate of 74.27 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 111.4 GTexel/s. The K3100M is slower at 11.30 GPixel/s and 45.18 GTexel/s.

Q: Which card has the higher FP32 performance?

A: The RX 6400 posts 3.565 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The K3100M posts 1,084.4 GFLOPS. The AMD card has a 228.9% lead in this metric.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon RX 6400 | NVIDIA Quadro K3100M |

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

| Chip | Navi 24 | GK104 |

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Kepler |

| Process | 6 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 5,400 million | 3,540 million |

| Die size | 107 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor density | 50.5M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1923 MHz | 706 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2321 MHz | 706 MHz |

| Game clock | 2039 MHz | N/A |

| Memory clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective) |

| Memory size | 4 GB GDDR6 | 4 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory bus | 64 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| Shading units | 768 | 768 |

| TMUs | 48 | 64 |

| ROPs | 32 | 32 |

| Ray cores | 12 | N/A |

| Pixel rate | 74.27 GPixel/s | 11.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 111.4 GTexel/s | 45.18 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.565 TFLOPS | 1,084.4 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 7.130 TFLOPS (2:1) | N/A |

| TDP | 53 W | 75 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | MXM Module |

| Power connectors | None | None |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x4 | MXM-B (3.0) |

| Display outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| Release date | 2022-01-18 | 2013-07-22 |

| Production status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database includes two head-to-head runs. The AMD part is the winner of both.

The first is Geekbench OpenCL. The RX 6400 scores 32,011, while the K3100M scores 6,154. That is a 420.2% difference in favor of the RX 6400. The RX 6400’s score is more than five times the K3100M’s score.

Next, in Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6400 scores 16,372 and the K3100M scores 5,484. The difference is 198.5% in favor of the RX 6400.

| Test | AMD Radeon RX 6400 | NVIDIA Quadro K3100M | Winner | Delta % |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 32011 | 6154 | AMD Radeon RX 6400 | 420.2% |

| Geekbench Vulkan | 16372 | 5484 | AMD Radeon RX 6400 | 198.5% |

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6400 is the only card with a win in the recorded benchmarks, and it wins both of them. The Quadro K3100M has no recorded wins in the database.

The biggest win for the RX 6400 comes in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where it scores 32011, which is 25,857 points higher than the K3100M’s 6154. The relative difference is 420.2%.

The RX 6400 also wins the Geekbench Vulkan test by a wide margin. Its 16,372 score is 10,888 points (198.5%) above the 5,484 of the K3100M.

The two cards are from different design eras. The RX 6400 is the newer architecture by a full generation, and the database shows it in the most direct way possible: the numbers are not close. For shoppers who prioritize benchmark leadership, the database recommendation is the AMD Radeon RX 6400.