AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000M Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT and NVIDIA Quadro M4000M represent two entirely different eras of GPU design. The database places them in adjacent percentile brackets (67th vs 65th), but the recorded benchmark data reveals a performance gap that is anything but close. This analysis examines the architectural divide, the measured head-to-head results, and what the numbers say about their respective positions in the market.

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in overall average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT has an average benchmark score of 22549, while the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M scores 20480. This places the AMD part 10.1% higher in aggregate performance.

Q: Which GPU has the larger memory capacity?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M has 4 GB of GDDR5. The AMD card also has a higher memory bandwidth at 432.0 GB/s versus 160.4 GB/s.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two chips?

A: The AMD Navi 32 chip contains 28,100 million transistors, compared to 5,200 million on the NVIDIA GM204. The AMD chip is built on a 5 nm process, while the NVIDIA chip uses a 28 nm process.

Q: Which GPU supports hardware ray tracing?

A: Only the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT has dedicated ray tracing cores, with 54 RT cores. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M has no RT cores listed in the database.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT is marked as "Active" production, while the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M is listed as "End-of-life". Their release dates are separated by roughly eight years.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in the Geekbench Vulkan test?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT scores 46443, which is 121.5% higher than the Quadro M4000M's score of 20971.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is generational. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture on a 5 nm process, while the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M relies on the older Maxwell 2.0 architecture on a 28 nm node. This process difference is stark: TSMC fabricates both, but the AMD chip packs 28,100 million transistors into a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip has 5,200 million transistors spread across a larger 398 mm² die, resulting in only 13.1 million transistors per square millimeter.

The memory subsystems reflect this generational gap. The AMD card uses 12 GB of GDDR6 across a 192-bit bus, achieving 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro M4000M uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 256-bit bus, but only reaches 160.4 GB/s. The AMD card's smaller bus width is more than compensated by the faster memory technology.

Compute resources also diverge significantly. The AMD GPU has 3456 shading units, 216 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. The NVIDIA GPU has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The AMD card adds 54 RT cores for hardware ray tracing, a feature entirely absent from the Maxwell-based Quadro. The AMD card's FP32 throughput is listed at 35.17 TFLOPS, while the Quadro manages 2.593 TFLOPS.

Power and interface characteristics differ as well. The AMD card is a dual-slot design with a 245 W TDP and two 8-pin power connectors, requiring a 550 W suggested PSU. The Quadro M4000M is an MXM module with a 100 W TDP and no dedicated power connectors, designed for portable workstations. The AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Quadro uses the older PCIe 3.0 x16 standard.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct benchmark comparisons between these GPUs, and both favor the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT decisively.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD card scores 138383 against the Quadro M4000M's 19989. This represents a 592.3% advantage for the AMD part, a massive margin that highlights the compute capability difference. The OpenCL workload stresses raw parallel processing, and the AMD card's 3456 shading units versus 1280, combined with the much higher clock speeds (2544 MHz boost versus 1013 MHz), explains the result.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows a narrower but still commanding lead. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT scores 46443, while the Quadro M4000M scores 20971, giving the AMD card a 121.5% advantage. Vulkan leverages modern API features and lower-level hardware access, where the RDNA 3.0 architecture has clear advantages in throughput and efficiency.

Across these two recorded tests, the AMD card wins both, with a 2-0 record in head-to-head matchups. The average benchmark scores reinforce this picture: the RX 7700 XT sits at 22549, while the Quadro M4000M sits at 20480. The AMD card's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile (22435, 0.5% behind) and the RTX 4060 Mobile (22729, 0.8% ahead), showing it competes with modern mid-range mobile parts. The Quadro M4000M's nearest rivals include the RTX 3070 Mobile (20534, 0.3% ahead) and Intel Arc B570 (20556, 0.4% ahead), placing it in a much older performance tier.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT dominates the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M in every recorded benchmark, with leads of 592.3% in OpenCL and 121.5% in Vulkan. The average benchmark score difference of about 10% further confirms the AMD card's superiority in raw performance.

For users selecting a GPU based on the database measurements, the RX 7700 XT is the obvious choice for any workload involving compute, gaming, or modern graphics APIs. Its 12 GB memory capacity, 54 RT cores, and 35.17 TFLOPS FP32 throughput place it in a completely different performance category. The Quadro M4000M, with its 4 GB memory and 2.593 TFLOPS FP32, is a legacy mobile workstation part that the data shows is outclassed by a factor of five or more in compute tasks.

The Quadro M4000M does retain relevance only in its form factor. As an MXM module with a 100 W TDP and no external power connectors, it fits in portable workstation chassis where the dual-slot, 245 W RX 7700 XT cannot physically be installed. For users constrained to that form factor, the Quadro is the only option of the two, but the performance sacrifice is substantial.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification:

• Process Node: AMD uses 5 nm, NVIDIA uses 28 nm
• Transistors: 28,100 million vs 5,200 million
• Die Size: 346 mm² vs 398 mm²
• Transistor Density: 81.2M / mm² vs 13.1M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1435 MHz vs 975 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2544 MHz vs 1013 MHz
• Memory Size: 12 GB vs 4 GB
• Memory Type: GDDR6 vs GDDR5
• Memory Bus: 192 bit vs 256 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 432.0 GB/s vs 160.4 GB/s
• Shading Units: 3456 vs 1280
• TMUs: 216 vs 80
• ROPs: 96 vs 64
• RT Cores: 54 vs none
• Pixel Rate: 244.2 GPixel/s vs 64.83 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 549.5 GTexel/s vs 81.04 GTexel/s
• FP32: 35.17 TFLOPS vs 2.593 TFLOPS
• TDP: 245 W vs 100 W
• Slot Width: Dual-slot vs MXM Module
• Power Connectors: 2x 8-pin vs None
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 vs PCIe 3.0 x16
• Production Status: Active vs End-of-life
• Release Date: 2023 vs 2015

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT wins in every performance category recorded in the database. Its 592.3% lead in OpenCL compute makes it the clear choice for GPU-accelerated workloads like rendering, simulation, or machine learning inference. The 121.5% lead in Vulkan positions it strongly for modern gaming and applications that leverage explicit graphics APIs. Its 12 GB memory capacity supports larger textures and datasets than the 4 GB available on the Quadro.

The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M's only advantages are in physical specifications. Its 100 W TDP and MXM form factor allow installation in portable workstations where the RX 7700 XT's 245 W dual-slot design cannot fit. For users with existing MXM-based systems, the Quadro provides a drop-in upgrade path within that constraint. Additionally, its 256-bit memory bus is wider than the AMD card's 192-bit bus, though the significantly lower memory clock means this does not translate to higher bandwidth.

The data does not support any performance-based reason to choose the Quadro M4000M over the RX 7700 XT. The AMD card is faster, newer, more capable, and still in active production. The Quadro's role is limited to legacy mobile workstations where its form factor and power envelope are the deciding factors.