GeForce4 4200 Go vs Tesla K20c
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Tesla K20c with GeForce4 4200 Go, including specs and performance data.
K20c outperforms GeForce4 4200 Go by a whopping 82700% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 565 | 1604 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.16 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 2.85 | no data |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | no data |
| GPU code name | GK110 | NV28M |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 12 November 2012 (13 years ago) | 15 November 2002 (23 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,199 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 | 2496 | 6 |
| Core clock speed | 706 MHz | 2 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 200 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 7,080 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 150 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 146.8 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 3.524 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 40 | no data |
| TMUs | 208 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 208 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 1280 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).
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | no data |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | no 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 type | GDDR5 | DDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | 5 GB | 128 MB |
| Memory bus width | 320 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1300 MHz | 200 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 208.0 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 | No outputs | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | DDR |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | - |
| CUDA | 3.5 | - |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Palworld | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Palworld | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Palworld | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Palworld | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 24 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.28 | 0.01 |
| Recency | 12 November 2012 | 15 November 2002 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 5 GB | 128 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 150 nm |
Tesla K20c has a 82700% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 3900% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 436% more advanced lithography process.
The Tesla K20c is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce4 4200 Go in performance tests.
Be aware that Tesla K20c is a workstation graphics card while GeForce4 4200 Go is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
