
Quadro M520 vs Radeon Pro WX 4130

Quadro M520
Popular choices:

Radeon Pro WX 4130
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Quadro M520 is positioned at rank 145 and the Radeon Pro WX 4130 is on rank 186, so the Quadro M520 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro M520
Performance Per Dollar Radeon Pro WX 4130
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro M520 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Radeon Pro WX 4130 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro M520 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro M520 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro M520 holds the technical lead. Priced at $50 (vs $100), it costs 50% less, resulting in a 102.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro M520 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+102.4%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($50) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($100) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro M520 and Radeon Pro WX 4130

Quadro M520
The Quadro M520 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 11 2017. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1041 MHz to 1019 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 25W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,913 points.

Radeon Pro WX 4130
The Radeon Pro WX 4130 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 1 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1002 MHz to 1053 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,890 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro M520 scores 1,913 and the Radeon Pro WX 4130 reaches 1,890 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M520 is built on Maxwell while the Radeon Pro WX 4130 uses GCN 4.0, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 384 (Quadro M520) vs 640 (Radeon Pro WX 4130). Raw compute: 0.7995 TFLOPS (Quadro M520) vs 1.348 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro WX 4130). Boost clocks: 1019 MHz vs 1053 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro M520 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,913+1% | 1,890 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 640+67% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7995 TFLOPS | 1.348 TFLOPS+69% |
| Boost Clock | 1019 MHz | 1053 MHz+3% |
| ROPs | 8 | 16+100% |
| TMUs | 16 | 40+150% |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 160 KB+25% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro M520 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro M520 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro WX 4130 has 4 GB. The Radeon Pro WX 4130 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Quadro M520 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro M520 draws 25W versus the Radeon Pro WX 4130's 50W — a 66.7% difference. The Quadro M520 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M520) vs 350W (Radeon Pro WX 4130). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro M520 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 25W-50% | 50W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 76.5+102% | 37.8 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro M520 launched at $200 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the Radeon Pro WX 4130 launched at $300 and now averages $100. The Quadro M520 costs 50% less ($50 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 38.3 (Quadro M520) vs 18.9 (Radeon Pro WX 4130) — the Quadro M520 offers 102.6% better value.
| Feature | Quadro M520 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $200-33% | $300 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50-50% | $100 |
| Performance per Dollar | 38.3+103% | 18.9 |
| Codename | GM108 | Baffin |
| Release | January 11 2017 | March 1 2017 |
| Ranking | #695 | #697 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















