NVS 4200M vs GeForce GTX 660M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 660M with NVS 4200M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 660M
2012
1 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
3.76
+408%

GTX 660M outperforms NVS 4200M by a whopping 408% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7071159
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.162.03
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGK107GF119
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date22 March 2012 (12 years ago)22 February 2011 (13 years ago)

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 cores38448
Core clock speed835 MHz810 MHz
Boost clock speed950 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,270 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate30.406.480
Floating-point processing power0.7296 TFLOPS0.1555 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs328

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth64.0 GB/s12.8 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolutionUp to 2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA+2.1

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.

GTX 660M 3.76
+408%
NVS 4200M 0.74

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.

GTX 660M 1449
+407%
NVS 4200M 286

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 660M 2369
+367%
NVS 4200M 507

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 660M 10971
+377%
NVS 4200M 2298

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.

GTX 660M 4031
+249%
NVS 4200M 1155

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:

900p32
+433%
6−7
−433%
Full HD35
+169%
13
−169%
1200p38
+443%
7−8
−443%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Battlefield 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Hitman 3 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+136%
10−12
−136%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+35.5%
30−35
−35.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Battlefield 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Hitman 3 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+136%
10−12
−136%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+35.5%
30−35
−35.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Hitman 3 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+136%
10−12
−136%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+35.5%
30−35
−35.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4 0−1
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

This is how GTX 660M and NVS 4200M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 660M is 433% faster in 900p
  • GTX 660M is 169% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 660M is 443% faster in 1200p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 660M is 1050% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 660M surpassed NVS 4200M in all 35 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.76 0.74
Recency 22 March 2012 22 February 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 25 Watt

GTX 660M has a 408.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 4200M, on the other hand, has 100% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 660M is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 4200M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 660M is a notebook graphics card while NVS 4200M is a mobile 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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M
GeForce GTX 660M
NVIDIA NVS 4200M
NVS 4200M

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.


3.6 211 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 660M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 146 votes

Rate NVS 4200M 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.