GeForce4 420 Go vs Quadro 400

Place in the ranking	1261	1519
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.01	no data
Power efficiency	0.83	no data
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Celsius (1999−2005)
GPU code name	GT216	NV17 A5
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	5 April 2011 (13 years ago)	6 February 2002 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$169	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores	48	2
Core clock speed	450 MHz	200 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	190 MHz
Number of transistors	486 million	29 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	32 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	7.200	0.8
Floating-point processing power	0.108 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	8	2
TMUs	16	4

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	AGP 4x
Length	163 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	DDR3	DDR
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	32 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	770 MHz	200 MHz
Memory bandwidth	12.32 GB/s	3.2 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

1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	8.0
Shader Model	4.1	no data
OpenGL	3.3	1.3
OpenCL	1.1	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	1.2	-

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.

Quadro 400 0.38
+3700%

GeForce4 420 Go 0.01

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.

Quadro 400 148
+4833%

GeForce4 420 Go 3

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 Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

2−3

+0%

2−3

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

+0%

2−3

+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

+0%

2−3

+0%

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 29 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.38	0.01
Recency	5 April 2011	6 February 2002
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	32 MB
Chip lithography	40 nm	150 nm

Quadro 400 has a 3700% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 275% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro 400 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce4 420 Go in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 400 is a workstation card while GeForce4 420 Go is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.