NVIDIA Quadro K4100M vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5470
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K4100M and ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5470 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K4100M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- 11.3x more texture fill rate: 67.78 GTexel / s vs 6 GTexel / s
- 14.4x more pipelines: 1152 vs 80
- 13.6x better floating-point performance: 1,627 gflops vs 120 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 8x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 512 MB
- 11.7x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2772 vs 236
- 4.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 8831 vs 2112
- Around 58% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1974 vs 1247
- Around 93% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3246 vs 1679
- Around 58% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1974 vs 1247
- Around 93% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3246 vs 1679
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 23 July 2013 vs 7 January 2010 |
Texture fill rate | 67.78 GTexel / s vs 6 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1152 vs 80 |
Floating-point performance | 1,627 gflops vs 120 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 512 MB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2772 vs 236 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8831 vs 2112 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1974 vs 1247 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3246 vs 1679 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1974 vs 1247 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3246 vs 1679 |
Reasons to consider the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5470
- Around 6% higher core clock speed: 750 MHz vs 706 MHz
- 6.7x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 100 Watt
- Around 11% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 362 vs 325
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 750 MHz vs 706 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 100 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 362 vs 325 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K4100M
GPU 2: ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5470
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA Quadro K4100M | ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5470 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2772 | 236 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 325 | 362 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8831 | 2112 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 24.487 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 600.985 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.281 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 35.452 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 61.984 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1105 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1974 | 1247 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3246 | 1679 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1105 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1974 | 1247 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3246 | 1679 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA Quadro K4100M | ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5470 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Kepler | TeraScale 2 |
Code name | GK104 | Park |
Launch date | 23 July 2013 | 7 January 2010 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $1,499 | |
Place in performance rating | 1074 | 1077 |
Price now | $379.99 | |
Type | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
Value for money (0-100) | 9.50 | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 706 MHz | 750 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 1,627 gflops | 120 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 1152 | 80 |
Texture fill rate | 67.78 GTexel / s | 6 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt | 15 Watt |
Transistor count | 3,540 million | 292 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 11.2 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Shader Model | 5 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 512 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 102.4 GB / s | 25.6 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 3200 MHz | 3200 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR2, GDDR2, DDR3, GDDR3, GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision Pro | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus |