Riva TNT2 vs Quadro K4200

Place in the ranking	495	1614
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.93	no data
Power efficiency	7.45	no data
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Fahrenheit (1998−2000)
GPU code name	GK104	NV5
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	22 July 2014 (12 years ago)	12 October 1999 (27 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$854.99	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1344	no data
Core clock speed	771 MHz	125 MHz
Boost clock speed	784 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	3,540 million	15 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	250 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	108 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	87.81	0.25
Floating-point processing power	2.107 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	2
TMUs	112	2
L1 Cache	112 KB	no data
L2 Cache	512 KB	no data

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	AGP 4x
Length	241 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	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	SDR
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1350 MHz	150 MHz
Memory bandwidth	172.8 GB/s	2.4 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors

1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort

1x VGA

API and SDK support

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	6.0
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.6	1.2
OpenCL	1.2	N/A
Vulkan	+	N/A
CUDA	3.0	-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

Quadro K4200 10.32
+103100%

Riva TNT2 0.01

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.

Quadro K4200 4326
+144100%

Samples: 1393

Riva TNT2 3
Samples: 24

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	10.32	0.01
Recency	22 July 2014	12 October 1999
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	250 nm

Quadro K4200 has a 103100% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 25500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 89% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro K4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Riva TNT2 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K4200 is a workstation graphics card while Riva TNT2 is a desktop one.