AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000M Comparison

# AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000M

The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL and NVIDIA Quadro M4000M are two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions that target very different design philosophies, and the benchmark data reflects a genuine split. The AMD part, built on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, is a compact integrated graphics package with HBM2 memory, while the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M is a larger, 28 nm TSMC-built MXM module with GDDR5. Their average benchmark scores are close — 21153 for the AMD and 20480 for the NVIDIA — but the raw averages hide a story of API-specific dominance. The AMD wins the Vulkan test decisively, while the NVIDIA edges ahead in OpenCL, and the underlying specifications reveal why these GPUs appeal to different users despite their similar overall performance.

Where Each One Wins

The clearest separation appears in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL scores 22757 against the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M's 20971, a delta of 8.5% in AMD's favor. This is the largest performance gap in either direction, and it signals that the AMD architecture handles the lower-level, modern graphics API workload with significantly more efficiency. For any workload that leans on Vulkan — commonly found in newer game engines and compute applications — the data suggests the AMD part is the stronger choice.

The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M counters in the Geekbench OpenCL test, scoring 19989 versus AMD's 19549, a 2.2% advantage. While the margin is smaller than AMD's Vulkan lead, it is consistent with the Quadro's positioning: OpenCL is widely used in professional compute and rendering pipelines, and the NVIDIA part's slight edge here, combined with its older Maxwell architecture, indicates that it remains competitive in that specific API environment. Notably, the NVIDIA GPU also delivers a higher pixel rate of 64.83 GPixel/s versus AMD's 32.35 GPixel/s, which suggests it handles fill-rate-bound tasks more effectively, even though the overall benchmark average favors AMD.

Interpreting the wins by use case, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL looks better suited for scenarios where Vulkan is the primary interface — think modern cross-platform graphics and compute workloads. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, with its OpenCL strength and higher pixel throughput, appears more aligned with traditional professional workloads that rely on that API. The aggregate scores — AMD's average of 21153 versus NVIDIA's 20480 — put AMD ahead by roughly 3.3%, but the split wins mean the choice depends entirely on which API the user's software invokes.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs diverge sharply at the architectural level. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL uses the Polaris 22 chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 5,000 million transistors into a 208 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.0M per mm². The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, in contrast, uses the GM204 chip based on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, produced on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 5,200 million transistors spread across a much larger 398 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of just 13.1M per mm². The AMD process advantage is clear: it crams nearly twice the density into half the die area.

Memory subsystems differ fundamentally. The AMD part features 4 GB of HBM2 memory on a 1024-bit bus, delivering 179.2 GB/s of bandwidth at 700 MHz (1400 Mbps effective). The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M also has 4 GB, but uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing 160.4 GB/s at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). AMD's HBM2 offers roughly 11.7% more bandwidth, which helps explain its Vulkan advantage, whereas NVIDIA's wider-but-slower GDDR5 configuration trades bandwidth for lower complexity.

Core counts are identical — both have 1280 shading units and 80 texture mapping units — but the ROP counts differ: AMD has 32 ROPs, NVIDIA has 64. This explains NVIDIA's pixel rate of 64.83 GPixel/s versus AMD's 32.35 GPixel/s, as the ROP count directly impacts pixel throughput. Clock speeds are close, with AMD boosting to 1011 MHz and NVIDIA to 1013 MHz, but the FP32 compute is nearly identical at 2.588 TFLOPS versus 2.593 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA also supports DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4, while AMD supports DirectX 12_0 and Vulkan 1.3. Power and form factor differ substantially: AMD is a 65 W IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, while NVIDIA is a 100 W MXM module also without external power connectors.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL is the better choice for users whose workloads prioritize Vulkan performance. Its 8.5% lead in that benchmark, combined with higher memory bandwidth (179.2 GB/s versus 160.4 GB/s) and a significantly smaller, lower-power design (65 W versus 100 W), makes it an attractive option for modern, API-forward applications. The AMD part also holds a slight edge in average benchmark score (21153 versus 20480) and a higher percentile ranking (66th versus 65th percentile among all GPUs).

The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M is the pick for OpenCL-centric professional tasks. Its 2.2% advantage in that test, along with double the ROP count (64 versus 32) and a higher pixel rate (64.83 GPixel/s versus 32.35 GPixel/s), suggests it handles certain rasterization-heavy or fill-rate-limited workloads more gracefully. The NVIDIA also supports DirectX 12_1, a higher feature level than AMD's 12_0, which may matter for specific compatibility requirements.

The verdict is not a blanket recommendation for either. Users running Vulkan-based engines or compute should lean AMD; those locked into OpenCL pipelines or needing higher pixel throughput should lean NVIDIA. The data shows a tie in wins (1-1), so the decision hinges on the specific API environment rather than overall superiority. Neither GPU is a clear winner for general use — the AMD's average score advantage is modest (3.3%), and the NVIDIA's pixel rate advantage is large but narrow in applicability.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL has an average benchmark score of 21153, which is 3.3% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M's 20480.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL offers 179.2 GB/s of bandwidth via HBM2, while the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M provides 160.4 GB/s via GDDR5, giving AMD an 11.7% advantage.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark gap between them?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL scores 22757 versus 20971 for the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, a delta of 8.5% in AMD's favor.

Q: Do the two GPUs have the same shading unit count?

A: Yes, both the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL and NVIDIA Quadro M4000M have 1280 shading units and 80 texture mapping units.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M has a pixel rate of 64.83 GPixel/s, which is double the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL's 32.35 GPixel/s, due to its 64 ROPs versus AMD's 32.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL has a TDP of 65 W, while the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M has a TDP of 100 W, making AMD the more power-efficient option.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two Geekbench tests tell a clear story of divergent strengths. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M wins with a score of 19989 against AMD's 19549, a delta of -2.2% for AMD. This narrow margin — just 440 points — is within the noise of typical benchmark variation, but it consistently favors the NVIDIA part. The OpenCL result aligns with NVIDIA's Maxwell architecture, which was well-optimized for professional compute environments, and the Quadro's 64 ROPs may contribute to its edge in certain memory-bound OpenCL kernels.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL takes a commanding win with 22757 versus 20971, a delta of 8.5%. That 1786-point gap is the largest in the comparison and cannot be dismissed as variance. AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture, paired with HBM2's higher bandwidth (179.2 GB/s versus 160.4 GB/s), appears better suited to Vulkan's explicit, low-overhead model. The Vulkan score also pushes AMD's average benchmark score to 21153, which is 3.3% above the NVIDIA's 20480.

Looking at the nearest rivals for context, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL sits between the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21237, -0.4%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 (21035, +0.6%), while also trailing the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (21379, -1.1%) and leading the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20713, +2.1%). The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, meanwhile, is just below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (20534, -0.3%), the Intel Arc B570 (20556, -0.4%), the Intel Arc A750 (20582, -0.5%), and the AMD Radeon R9 M390X (20662, -0.9%). These rival positions show that both GPUs are mid-pack performers, with AMD slightly higher in the overall distribution.

The wins are split exactly 1-1, so the head-to-head record is a tie. But the magnitude of AMD's Vulkan win (8.5%) outweighs NVIDIA's OpenCL win (2.2%) in percentage terms, which is why AMD's average score is higher. For users running both APIs, the AMD part would likely deliver a better overall experience, but for single-API workloads, the winner depends on which API is used.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every major specification category. The process node is a key differentiator: AMD uses 14 nm from GlobalFoundries, while NVIDIA uses 28 nm from TSMC. This drives the die size difference — AMD's Polaris 22 chip is 208 mm², NVIDIA's GM204 is 398 mm² — and the transistor density of 24.0M / mm² for AMD versus 13.1M / mm² for NVIDIA. Transistor counts are close (5,000 million versus 5,200 million), but AMD achieves this in half the area.

Memory differs in type and bus width: AMD uses 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus, while NVIDIA uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The bandwidth reflects this: 179.2 GB/s for AMD versus 160.4 GB/s for NVIDIA. Memory clocks also differ: AMD runs at 700 MHz (1400 Mbps effective), NVIDIA at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

ROP count is 32 for AMD and 64 for NVIDIA, leading to pixel rates of 32.35 GPixel/s and 64.83 GPixel/s, respectively. Texture rates are nearly identical at 80.88 GTexel/s for AMD and 81.04 GTexel/s for NVIDIA, matching the 80 TMUs on both. FP32 compute is essentially equal at 2.588 TFLOPS versus 2.593 TFLOPS, though AMD also offers FP16 at 2.588 TFLOPS (1:1) while NVIDIA lists no FP16 capability.

Base clocks are 931 MHz for AMD and 975 MHz for NVIDIA, with boost clocks of 1011 MHz and 1013 MHz, respectively. TDP differs substantially: 65 W for AMD versus 100 W for NVIDIA. The slot width is "IGP" for AMD and "MXM Module" for NVIDIA, with AMD using a bus interface of "IGP" and NVIDIA using "PCIe 3.0 x16". Power connectors are "None" for both. API support differs: AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3; NVIDIA supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent" for both. Release dates are 2018-01-31 for AMD and 2015-08-17 for NVIDIA, with the NVIDIA part having a predecessor (Quadro Kepler-M) and successor (Quadro Pascal-M) while AMD lists none.