Quadro P4200 vs GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 with Quadro P4200, including specs and performance data.

GTX 780 Rev. 2
2013, $649
3 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
9.77

P4200 outperforms 780 Rev. 2 by a whopping 137% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking491267
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.10no data
Power efficiency3.0017.82
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGK110BGP104
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date10 September 2013 (12 years ago)21 February 2018 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 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

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 cores23042304
Core clock speed863 MHz1227 MHz
Boost clock speed902 MHz1647 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate173.2237.2
Floating-point processing power4.156 TFLOPS7.589 TFLOPS
ROPs4864
TMUs192144
L1 Cache192 KB864 KB
L2 Cache1536 KB2 MB

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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
Maximum RAM amount3 GB8 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.4 GB/s192.3 GB/s
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA3.56.1

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

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.77 23.19
Recency 10 September 2013 21 February 2018
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 16 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 100 Watt

Quadro P4200 has a 137.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 is a desktop graphics card while Quadro P4200 is a mobile workstation one.

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 780 Rev. 2
GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
NVIDIA Quadro P4200
Quadro P4200

Other comparisons

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.


4.2 13 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 81 votes

Rate Quadro P4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 or Quadro P4200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.