
Radeon R9 M380 vs Quadro K4100M

Radeon R9 M380
Popular choices:

Quadro K4100M
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 Radeon R9 M380 is positioned at rank 379 and the Quadro K4100M is on rank 52, so the Quadro K4100M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R9 M380
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K4100M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro K4100M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.8% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 M380.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M380 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro K4100M offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro K4100M holds the technical lead. Priced at $261 (vs $300), it costs 13% less, resulting in a 15.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M380 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+15.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300) | ✅More affordable ($261) |
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 Radeon R9 M380 and Quadro K4100M

Radeon R9 M380
The Radeon R9 M380 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 5 2015. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 900 MHz to 1000 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,752 points.

Quadro K4100M
The Quadro K4100M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 706 MHz. It has 1152 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,773 points. Launch price was $1,499.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 M380 scores 2,752 and the Quadro K4100M reaches 2,773 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 M380 is built on GCN 2.0 while the Quadro K4100M uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 768 (Radeon R9 M380) vs 1,152 (Quadro K4100M). Raw compute: 1.536 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M380) vs 1.627 TFLOPS (Quadro K4100M).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M380 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,752 | 2,773 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 1152+50% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.536 TFLOPS | 1.627 TFLOPS+6% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 48 | 96+100% |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB+100% | 96 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 M380 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Radeon R9 M380) vs 512 KB (Quadro K4100M) — the Quadro K4100M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M380 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 M380 draws 75W versus the Quadro K4100M's 100W — a 28.6% difference. The Radeon R9 M380 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R9 M380) vs 350W (Quadro K4100M). Power connectors: Mobile vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M380 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-25% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Mobile | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | — |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 85 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 36.7+32% | 27.7 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 M380 launched at $300 MSRP and currently averages $300, while the Quadro K4100M launched at $1499 and now averages $261. The Quadro K4100M costs 13% less ($39 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 9.2 (Radeon R9 M380) vs 10.6 (Quadro K4100M) — the Quadro K4100M offers 15.2% better value. The Radeon R9 M380 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2013).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M380 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $300-80% | $1499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $300 | $261-13% |
| Performance per Dollar | 9.2 | 10.6+15% |
| Codename | Strato | GK104 |
| Release | May 5 2015 | July 23 2013 |
| Ranking | #607 | #604 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















