Quadro K420 vs GeForce 920M
Aggregated performance score
Quadro K420 outperforms GeForce 920M by a minimal 3% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 871 | 862 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.05 | 0.08 |
Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
GPU code name | N16V-GM-S | GK107 |
Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
Release date | 27 January 2015 (9 years ago) | 22 July 2014 (9 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $96.67 |
Current price | $895 | $402 (4.2x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Quadro K420 has 60% better value for money than GeForce 920M.
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 cores | 384 | 192 |
Core clock speed | 954 MHz | 876 MHz |
Number of transistors | 915 million | 1,270 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 33 Watt | 41 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 30.53 | 14.02 |
Floating-point performance | 297.6 gflops | 336.4 gflops |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on GeForce 920M and Quadro K420 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | no data |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | no data | 160 mm |
Width | no data | 1" (2.5 cm) |
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 | DDR3 | 128 Bit |
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1 GB/2 GB |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1782 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | Up to 29 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 Connectors | No outputs | DVI-I DP |
Number of simultaneous displays | no data | 4 |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
GPU Boost | 2.0 | no data |
Optimus | + | no data |
GameWorks | + | no data |
3D Vision Pro | no data | + |
Mosaic | no data | + |
nView Desktop Management | no data | + |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 |
Shader Model | 5.1 | 5 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Vulkan | 1.1.126 | + |
CUDA | + | 3.0 |
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.
Quadro K420 outperforms GeForce 920M by 3% based on our aggregated 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%
Quadro K420 outperforms GeForce 920M by 3% in Passmark.
GeekBench 5 OpenCL
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.
Benchmark coverage: 9%
GeForce 920M outperforms Quadro K420 by 104% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.
GeekBench 5 Vulkan
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.
Benchmark coverage: 5%
GeForce 920M outperforms Quadro K420 by 75% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.
GeekBench 5 CUDA
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.
Benchmark coverage: 4%
GeForce 920M outperforms Quadro K420 by 105% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.
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 | 16
+0%
| 16−18
+0%
|
4K | 9
+0%
| 9−10
+0%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 16
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 15
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
Hitman 3 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 2
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
This is how GeForce 920M and Quadro K420 compete in popular games:
- Quadro K420 is 0% faster in 1080p
- Quadro K420 is 0% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 1.87 | 1.93 |
Recency | 27 January 2015 | 22 July 2014 |
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1 GB/2 GB |
Power consumption (TDP) | 33 Watt | 41 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce 920M and Quadro K420.
Be aware that GeForce 920M is a notebook card while Quadro K420 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.