Quadro RTX 6000 vs NVS 4200M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 4200M with Quadro RTX 6000, including specs and performance data.

NVS 4200M
2011
1 GB DDR3, 25 Watt
0.72

RTX 6000 outperforms 4200M by a whopping 5806% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking121599
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data2.35
Power efficiency2.2312.68
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGF119TU102
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date22 February 2011 (14 years ago)13 August 2018 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$6,299

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 cores484608
Core clock speed810 MHz1440 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1770 MHz
Number of transistors292 million18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt260 Watt
Texture fill rate6.480509.8
Floating-point processing power0.1555 TFLOPS16.31 TFLOPS
ROPs496
TMUs8288
Tensor Coresno data576
Ray Tracing Coresno data72
L1 Cache64 KB4.5 MB
L2 Cache128 KB6 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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXMPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB24 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/s672.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.17.5
DLSS-+

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.

NVS 4200M 0.72
RTX 6000 42.52
+5806%

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.

NVS 4200M 304
Samples: 1429
RTX 6000 17993
+5819%
Samples: 236

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.

NVS 4200M 1258
RTX 6000 146285
+11528%

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 HD13
−5669%
750−800
+5669%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data8.40

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−5700%
290−300
+5700%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−5400%
55−60
+5400%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−5700%
290−300
+5700%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−5700%
290−300
+5700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−5525%
450−500
+5525%
Valorant 27−30
−5762%
1700−1750
+5762%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 20−22
−5650%
1150−1200
+5650%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%
Dota 2 12−14
−5669%
750−800
+5669%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−5400%
55−60
+5400%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−5700%
290−300
+5700%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−5700%
290−300
+5700%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−5400%
55−60
+5400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−5525%
450−500
+5525%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−5733%
350−400
+5733%
Valorant 27−30
−5762%
1700−1750
+5762%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%
Dota 2 12−14
−5669%
750−800
+5669%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−5400%
55−60
+5400%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−5700%
290−300
+5700%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−5700%
290−300
+5700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−5525%
450−500
+5525%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−5733%
350−400
+5733%
Valorant 27−30
−5762%
1700−1750
+5762%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−5567%
170−180
+5567%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 4−5
−5650%
230−240
+5650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−5614%
400−450
+5614%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%
Hogwarts Legacy 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−5400%
55−60
+5400%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
−5400%
55−60
+5400%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−5614%
800−850
+5614%
Valorant 4−5
−5650%
230−240
+5650%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%

This is how NVS 4200M and RTX 6000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 6000 is 5669% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.72 42.52
Recency 22 February 2011 13 August 2018
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 24 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 260 Watt

NVS 4200M has 940% lower power consumption.

RTX 6000, on the other hand, has a 5805.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 4200M in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 4200M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Quadro RTX 6000 is a 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 NVS 4200M
NVS 4200M
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000
Quadro RTX 6000

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.


3 173 votes

Rate NVS 4200M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 142 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about NVS 4200M or Quadro RTX 6000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.