Radeon RX 6400 vs Quadro K5100M

Place in the ranking	506	281
Place by popularity	not in top-100	92
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	53.37
Power efficiency	5.74	25.78
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GK104	Navi 24
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	23 July 2013 (11 years ago)	19 January 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$159

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores	1536	768
Core clock speed	771 MHz	1923 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2321 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	53 Watt
Texture fill rate	98.69	111.4
Floating-point processing power	2.369 TFLOPS	3.565 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	128	48
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	12

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 size	large	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x4
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	115.2 GB/s	128.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	-	+
Display Port	1.2	no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	-
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.7
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.2
Vulkan	+	1.3
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.

K5100M 8.34

RX 6400 19.85
+138%

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.

K5100M 3205

RX 6400 7631
+138%

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 HD	49 −124%	110−120 +124%
4K	29 −124%	65−70 +124%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	1.45
4K	no data	2.45

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −119%	35−40 +119%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −119%	35−40 +119%
Elden Ring	21−24 −117%	50−55 +117%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 −122%	60−65 +122%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −119%	35−40 +119%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −119%	35−40 +119%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −127%	75−80 +127%
Metro Exodus	21−24 −127%	50−55 +127%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −117%	50−55 +117%
Valorant	27−30 −124%	65−70 +124%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 −122%	60−65 +122%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −119%	35−40 +119%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −119%	35−40 +119%
Dota 2	27−30 −124%	65−70 +124%
Elden Ring	21−24 −117%	50−55 +117%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −136%	85−90 +136%
Fortnite	45−50 −124%	110−120 +124%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −127%	75−80 +127%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 −124%	65−70 +124%
Metro Exodus	21−24 −127%	50−55 +127%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 −127%	150−160 +127%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −117%	50−55 +117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	32 −134%	75−80 +134%
Valorant	27−30 −124%	65−70 +124%
World of Tanks	120−130 −132%	290−300 +132%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 −122%	60−65 +122%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −119%	35−40 +119%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −119%	35−40 +119%
Dota 2	27−30 −124%	65−70 +124%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −136%	85−90 +136%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −127%	75−80 +127%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 −127%	150−160 +127%
Valorant	27−30 −124%	65−70 +124%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	9−10 −133%	21−24 +133%
Elden Ring	10−12 −118%	24−27 +118%
Grand Theft Auto V	10−11 −110%	21−24 +110%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 −132%	95−100 +132%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 −129%	16−18 +129%
World of Tanks	60−65 −133%	140−150 +133%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 −133%	35−40 +133%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −110%	21−24 +110%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −133%	14−16 +133%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −122%	40−45 +122%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −135%	40−45 +135%
Metro Exodus	14−16 −114%	30−33 +114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −110%	21−24 +110%
Valorant	21−24 −114%	45−50 +114%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Dota 2	18−20 −137%	45−50 +137%
Elden Ring	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 −137%	45−50 +137%
Metro Exodus	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 −129%	55−60 +129%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −137%	45−50 +137%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −129%	16−18 +129%
Counter-Strike 2	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Dota 2	18−20 −137%	45−50 +137%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −110%	21−24 +110%
Fortnite	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −133%	21−24 +133%
Valorant	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%

This is how K5100M and RX 6400 compete in popular games:

RX 6400 is 124% faster in 1080p
RX 6400 is 124% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.34	19.85
Recency	23 July 2013	19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	53 Watt

K5100M has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RX 6400, on the other hand, has a 138% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 88.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K5100M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K5100M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 6400 is a desktop one.

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