AMD Radeon R9 M375 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA Quadro K4200 wins both recorded head-to-head tests against the AMD Radeon R9 M375, and it wins them by substantial margins. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Quadro K4200 scores 12313 against 10457 for the Radeon R9 M375, a 17.7% advantage. The Vulkan test shows an even larger gap: the Quadro K4200 scores 12482 while the Radeon R9 M375 manages only 9682, putting the NVIDIA card 28.9% ahead. These are not narrow victories; the Quadro K4200 leads by more than a quarter in Vulkan compute workloads, which points to a fundamental difference in execution resources rather than a minor clock advantage.

Looking at the average benchmark score, the Quadro K4200 posts 12398, which places it at the 52nd percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Radeon R9 M375 averages 10070, sitting at the 48th percentile. The 2328-point gap in average score is consistent with the head-to-head results, and the percentile ranking shows the Quadro K4200 landing just above the midpoint of the entire GPU field while the Radeon R9 M375 sits just below it. This is a meaningful separation, even if neither card is anywhere near the top of the overall rankings.

The nearest rivals for each card reinforce the picture. The Quadro K4200 sits within 1.8% of the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm (average score 12625), within 2.5% of the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT (12710), and within 2.9% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (12773). It is 3.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A (11998). The Radeon R9 M375, by contrast, is nearly tied with the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M (10043, a 0.3% difference), the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M (10013, 0.6% difference), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M (9959, 1.1% difference). It trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A (10273) by 2%. In other words, the Quadro K4200 competes in a higher performance tier than the Radeon R9 M375, whose closest comparables are older mobile-class parts.

The component-level specifications explain why the Quadro K4200 dominates. It carries 1344 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The Radeon R9 M375 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. That is roughly half the shading units, about a third of the TMUs, and half the ROPs. The Quadro K4200 also has a much wider memory bus at 256 bit versus 128 bit, and its GDDR5 memory runs at an effective 5.4 Gbps, producing 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R9 M375 uses DDR3 memory at 1800 Mbps effective, yielding just 28.80 GB/s. That is a 6x difference in memory bandwidth, and it shows up directly in the compute benchmarks, especially in the Vulkan test where memory access patterns tend to be demanding.

Clock speeds do not rescue the Radeon R9 M375. Its base clock is 1000 MHz with a boost of 1015 MHz, while the Quadro K4200 runs at 771 MHz base and 784 MHz boost. The AMD card clocks about 29% higher at base, but it has far fewer execution units, so the higher clock cannot compensate. The raw throughput numbers make this clear: the Quadro K4200 delivers 2.107 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 87.81 GTexel/s of texture rate, and 21.95 GPixel/s of pixel rate. The Radeon R9 M375 delivers 1,299.2 GFLOPS (about 1.30 TFLOPS), 40.60 GTexel/s, and 16.24 GPixel/s. The Quadro K4200 is ahead by roughly 62% in FP32 compute, 116% in texture rate, and 35% in pixel rate.

The silicon behind each card also differs substantially. The Quadro K4200 uses the GK104 chip on the Kepler architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, for a transistor density of 12.0 million per square millimeter. The Radeon R9 M375 uses the Tropo chip on GCN 1.0, also 28 nm at TSMC, but with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, for a density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The transistor densities are nearly identical, which makes sense given the same process node and foundry, but the Quadro K4200 packs more than twice the transistors onto a die that is more than twice as large. The Radeon R9 M375 is a much smaller, simpler chip, and the benchmark results reflect that.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: the NVIDIA Quadro K4200 is the stronger GPU by every measured metric. It wins both head-to-head tests, holds a higher average benchmark score, and ranks higher in the overall percentile distribution. The 17.7% lead in OpenCL and 28.9% lead in Vulkan are not marginal, and the underlying specifications show a wide gap in shading units, texture units, ROPs, memory bandwidth, and raw compute throughput. For anyone choosing between these two based on recorded performance, the Quadro K4200 is the clear pick.

The Radeon R9 M375 is not without its own characteristics, but they do not translate into benchmark wins. It has a higher base clock (1000 MHz versus 771 MHz) and a smaller die with a slightly higher transistor density (12.2M per mm² versus 12.0M per mm²), and it supports PCIe 3.0 x16 while the Quadro K4200 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. It also supports DirectX 12 (11_1) compared to the Quadro K4200's DirectX 12 (11_0), and its Vulkan version is 1.2.170 versus 1.2.175 for the NVIDIA card. But none of these advantages change the performance outcome. The Radeon R9 M375 sits at the 48th percentile, below the Quadro K4200's 52nd, and its average score of 10070 is 18.8% lower than the Quadro K4200's 12398.

The verdict is straightforward: the Quadro K4200 for performance, the Radeon R9 M375 only if the specific traits of a smaller, lower-power design matter more than raw compute results. The Radeon R9 M375 has no TDP listed in the database, while the Quadro K4200 is rated at 108 W and requires a single 6-pin power connector with a 300 W suggested PSU. The Quadro K4200 is also a single-slot card at 241 mm long and 111 mm tall, whereas the Radeon R9 M375 has no listed dimensions, slot width, or power connectors. The Radeon R9 M375 may be the lighter option in physical terms, but the database does not record any performance scenario where it beats the Quadro K4200.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 wins in every benchmark category recorded. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 12313 against 10457, a 17.7% edge. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 12482 against 9682, a 28.9% edge. Its average benchmark score is 12398 versus 10070, and its percentile ranking is 52 versus 48. The Quadro K4200 also wins on memory bandwidth, FP32 compute, texture rate, pixel rate, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, and memory bus width. There is no recorded test where the Radeon R9 M375 comes out ahead.

The AMD Radeon R9 M375 does have a few specification-level wins, even if they do not show up in the benchmark scores. It has a higher base clock (1000 MHz versus 771 MHz) and a higher boost clock (1015 MHz versus 784 MHz). It uses a newer bus interface, PCIe 3.0 x16, compared to the Quadro K4200's PCIe 2.0 x16. It supports a slightly higher DirectX feature level, 12 (11_1) versus 12 (11_0). Its transistor density is marginally higher at 12.2M per mm² versus 12.0M per mm². And it is built on the same 28 nm process at the same foundry, TSMC, but with a much smaller die: 123 mm² versus 294 mm². For workloads that are sensitive to clock speed rather than raw execution width, the Radeon R9 M375 could behave differently, but the recorded data does not show any such scenario.

For use-case planning, the Quadro K4200 is the card for compute-heavy tasks. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256 bit bus with 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth is far better suited to large data sets than the Radeon R9 M375's 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128 bit bus with 28.80 GB/s. The Quadro K4200's 1344 shading units and 112 TMUs give it a clear advantage in parallel workloads, and its 2.107 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput is roughly 62% higher than the Radeon R9 M375's 1,299.2 GFLOPS. The Radeon R9 M375, with its higher clocks and smaller footprint, might be more appropriate for light, latency-sensitive tasks, but the database records no benchmark win to support that.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4200, with an average score of 12398 compared to 10070 for the AMD Radeon R9 M375.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Vulkan compute?

A: The Quadro K4200 scores 12482 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Radeon R9 M375 scores 9682, a 28.9% difference in favor of the NVIDIA card.

Q: Does the Radeon R9 M375 win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The Quadro K4200 wins both recorded tests: Geekbench OpenCL (12313 versus 10457) and Geekbench Vulkan (12482 versus 9682).

Q: What memory configuration does each card use?

A: The Quadro K4200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon R9 M375 has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128 bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The Quadro K4200 has 1344 shading units, while the Radeon R9 M375 has 640.

Q: How do the two cards compare on process node and transistor count?

A: Both are built on 28 nm at TSMC. The Quadro K4200 has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die; the Radeon R9 M375 has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families. The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 is built on the Kepler architecture using the GK104 chip, part of the Quadro Kepler generation. The AMD Radeon R9 M375 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Tropo chip, part of the Gem System generation. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, so the process node is identical, but the underlying designs diverge sharply.

The transistor budgets tell the story. The Quadro K4200 packs 3,540 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, yielding a density of 12.0 million transistors per square millimeter. The Radeon R9 M375 has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, for a density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The densities are almost the same, which is expected from the same process and foundry, but the Quadro K4200 uses its larger die to deploy far more execution hardware: 1344 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs versus 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs on the Radeon.

Memory architecture is another major divide. The Quadro K4200 uses GDDR5 memory with a 256 bit bus, running at 1350 MHz with an effective 5.4 Gbps, for 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R9 M375 uses DDR3 memory with a 128 bit bus, running at 900 MHz with an effective 1800 Mbps, for 28.80 GB/s. The Quadro K4200 also has double the memory capacity: 4 GB versus 2 GB. The bus interface differs as well: the Quadro K4200 uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the Radeon R9 M375 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

The API support is close but not identical. The Quadro K4200 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The Radeon R9 M375 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA card has a slightly newer Vulkan version; the AMD card has a slightly higher DirectX feature level. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The Quadro K4200's compute output is 2.107 TFLOPS FP32, 87.81 GTexel/s texture rate, and 21.95 GPixel/s pixel rate. The Radeon R9 M375's is 1,299.2 GFLOPS FP32, 40.60 GTexel/s, and 16.24 GPixel/s.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two cards, based on the recorded data. The NVIDIA Quadro K4200 uses the GK104 chip with the Kepler architecture; the AMD Radeon R9 M375 uses the Tropo chip with GCN 1.0. The Quadro K4200 has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die; the Radeon R9 M375 has 1,500 million on 123 mm². Transistor density is 12.0M per mm² for the Quadro K4200 and 12.2M per mm² for the Radeon R9 M375.

Base clock: 771 MHz for the Quadro K4200, 1000 MHz for the Radeon R9 M375. Boost clock: 784 MHz versus 1015 MHz. Memory clock: 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective) for the Quadro K4200, 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) for the Radeon R9 M375. Memory size: 4 GB versus 2 GB. Memory type: GDDR5 versus DDR3. Bus width: 256 bit versus 128 bit. Bandwidth: 172.8 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s.

Shading units: 1344 versus 640. TMUs: 112 versus 40. ROPs: 32 versus 16. Pixel rate: 21.95 GPixel/s versus 16.24 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 87.81 GTexel/s versus 40.60 GTexel/s. FP32: 2.107 TFLOPS versus 1,299.2 GFLOPS. TDP: 108 W for the Quadro K4200, no TDP listed for the Radeon R9 M375. Slot width: single-slot for the Quadro K4200, not listed for the Radeon R9 M375. Power connectors: 1x 6-pin for the Quadro K4200, none listed for the Radeon R9 M375. Suggested PSU: 300 W for the Quadro K4200, none listed for the Radeon R9 M375.

Bus interface: PCIe 2.0 x16 for the Quadro K4200, PCIe 3.0 x16 for the Radeon R9 M375. Display outputs: 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 for the Quadro K4200, none listed for the Radeon R9 M375. Dimensions: 241 mm (9.5 inches) long and 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall for the Quadro K4200, no dimensions listed for the Radeon R9 M375. DirectX: 12 (11_0) for the Quadro K4200, 12 (11_1) for the Radeon R9 M375. Vulkan: 1.2.175 for the Quadro K4200, 1.2.170 for the Radeon R9 M375. OpenGL is the same for both at 4.6. Release dates: 2014-07-21 for the Quadro K4200, 2015-05-04 for the Radeon R9 M375. Production status for both is end-of-life.