Radeon Pro WX 4130 vs Quadro P4000 Mobile

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P4000 Mobile and Radeon Pro WX 4130, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

P4000 Mobile
2017
8 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
20.74
+252%

P4000 Mobile outperforms Pro WX 4130 by a whopping 252% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking278600
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.79no data
Power efficiency14.228.09
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGP104Baffin
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date11 January 2017 (8 years ago)1 March 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$819.61 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1792640
Core clock speed1227 MHz1002 MHz
Boost clock speed1228 MHz1053 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate137.442.12
Floating-point processing power4.398 TFLOPS1.348 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs11240

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargemedium sized
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth192 GB/s96 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Display Port1.4no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync-+
Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX1212 (12_0)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA6.1-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.74 5.90
Recency 11 January 2017 1 March 2017
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 50 Watt

P4000 Mobile has a 251.5% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Pro WX 4130, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 month, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P4000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro WX 4130 in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Quadro P4000 Mobile
Quadro P4000
AMD Radeon Pro WX 4130
Radeon Pro WX 4130

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.3 24 votes

Rate Quadro P4000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 34 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 4130 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P4000 Mobile or Radeon Pro WX 4130, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.