Quadro K4000 vs Radeon R9 380

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

R9 380
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
15.91
+126%

Radeon R9 380 outperforms Quadro K4000 by a whopping 126% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking315521
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.081.68
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameTonga ProGK106
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date26 June 2015 (9 years ago)1 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $1,269
Current price$12.90 (0.1x MSRP)$330 (0.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 380 has 440% better value for money than Quadro K4000.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1792768
Compute units28no data
Core clock speedno data810 MHz
Boost clock speed970 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,000 million2,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rate108.651.84
Floating-point performance3,476 gflops1,244 gflops

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length221 mm241 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Form factorfull height / full length / dual slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2 x 6-pin1x 6-pin
Bridgeless CrossFire1no 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
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB3 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed970 MHz5616 MHz
Memory bandwidth182.4 GB/s134.8 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
Eyefinity+no data
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+no data
DisplayPort support+no data

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration-no data
CrossFire1no data
Enduro-no data
FRTC1no data
FreeSync1no data
HD3D+no data
LiquidVR1no data
PowerTune+no data
TrueAudio+no data
ZeroCore+no data
VCE+no data
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan++
Mantle+no data
CUDAno data3.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 380 15.91
+126%
Quadro K4000 7.05

Radeon R9 380 outperforms Quadro K4000 by 126% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

R9 380 6146
+126%
Quadro K4000 2723

Radeon R9 380 outperforms Quadro K4000 by 126% in Passmark.

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 HD63
+133%
27−30
−133%
4K24
+140%
10−12
−140%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+120%
24−27
−120%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 70−75
+119%
30−35
−119%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+112%
24−27
−112%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+112%
50−55
−112%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 70−75
+119%
30−35
−119%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+120%
24−27
−120%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+116%
35−40
−116%
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
+121%
40−45
−121%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+113%
75−80
−113%
Hitman 3 65−70
+110%
30−35
−110%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+122%
60−65
−122%
Metro Exodus 110−120
+108%
50−55
−108%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+116%
40−45
−116%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+120%
50−55
−120%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+116%
50−55
−116%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 70−75
+119%
30−35
−119%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+112%
24−27
−112%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+112%
50−55
−112%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 70−75
+119%
30−35
−119%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+120%
24−27
−120%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+116%
35−40
−116%
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
+121%
40−45
−121%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+113%
75−80
−113%
Hitman 3 65−70
+110%
30−35
−110%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+122%
60−65
−122%
Metro Exodus 110−120
+108%
50−55
−108%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+116%
40−45
−116%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+120%
50−55
−120%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 110−120
+116%
51
−116%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+116%
50−55
−116%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 70−75
+119%
30−35
−119%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+112%
24−27
−112%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 70−75
+119%
30−35
−119%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+120%
24−27
−120%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+116%
35−40
−116%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+113%
75−80
−113%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+122%
60−65
−122%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+120%
50−55
−120%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+117%
30
−117%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+116%
50−55
−116%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+116%
40−45
−116%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+110%
30−35
−110%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+117%
30−33
−117%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+119%
16−18
−119%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+108%
12−14
−108%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+125%
20−22
−125%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+112%
24−27
−112%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+117%
30−33
−117%
Hitman 3 40−45
+111%
18−20
−111%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+119%
30−35
−119%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+114%
27−30
−114%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+117%
30−33
−117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+106%
16−18
−106%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+112%
24−27
−112%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+119%
16−18
−119%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
Hitman 3 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+106%
16−18
−106%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+111%
19
−111%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+114%
21−24
−114%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+106%
16−18
−106%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+100%
14−16
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%

This is how R9 380 and Quadro K4000 compete in popular games:

  • R9 380 is 133% faster in 1080p
  • R9 380 is 140% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.91 7.05
Recency 26 June 2015 1 March 2013
Cost $199 $1269
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 3 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 80 Watt

The Radeon R9 380 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 380 is a desktop card while Quadro K4000 is a 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 380
Radeon R9 380
NVIDIA Quadro K4000
Quadro K4000

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.


4.1 764 votes

Rate Radeon R9 380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 180 votes

Rate Quadro K4000 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.