Quadro K4100M vs Radeon R9 280

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 with Quadro K4100M, including specs and performance data.

R9 280
2014
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
14.40
+102%

R9 280 outperforms K4100M by a whopping 102% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking361540
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.260.47
Power efficiency4.994.94
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameTahitiGK104
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (10 years ago)23 July 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 $1,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 280 has 1019% better value for money than K4100M.

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 cores17921152
Core clock speedno data706 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,313 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate104.567.78
Floating-point processing power3.344 TFLOPS1.627 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs11296

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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pinno data

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 amount3 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth240 GB/s102.4 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data
Optimus-+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan++
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R9 280 14.40
+102%
K4100M 7.14

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R9 280 5555
+102%
K4100M 2756

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R9 280 8020
+119%
K4100M 3654

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD95−100
+97.9%
48
−97.9%
4K24−27
+84.6%
13
−84.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.9431.23
4K11.63115.31

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 67
+0%
67
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hitman 3 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how R9 280 and K4100M compete in popular games:

  • R9 280 is 98% faster in 1080p
  • R9 280 is 85% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.40 7.14
Recency 4 March 2014 23 July 2013
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 100 Watt

R9 280 has a 101.7% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 7 months.

K4100M, on the other hand, has a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 100% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K4100M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 is a desktop card while Quadro K4100M is a mobile workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


AMD Radeon R9 280
Radeon R9 280
NVIDIA Quadro K4100M
Quadro K4100M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.6 384 votes

Rate Radeon R9 280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 77 votes

Rate Quadro K4100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.