Quadro K420 vs Quadro FX 4800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 4800 and Quadro K420, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FX 4800
2008
1536 MB GDDR3, 150 Watt
2.55
+32.8%

FX 4800 outperforms K420 by a substantial 33% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking826906
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.050.08
Power efficiency1.173.21
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGT200BGK107
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date11 November 2008 (16 years ago)22 July 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,799 $96.67

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro K420 has 60% better value for money than FX 4800.

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 cores192192
Core clock speed602 MHz876 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt41 Watt
Texture fill rate38.5314.02
Floating-point processing power0.4623 TFLOPS0.3364 TFLOPS
ROPs2416
TMUs6416

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length267 mm160 mm
Width2-slot1" (2.5 cm)
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-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 typeGDDR3128 Bit
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB1 GB/2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz891 MHz
Memory bandwidth76.8 GB/sUp to 29 GB/s

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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displaysno data4

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Desktop Managementno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.34.5
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA1.33.0

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.

FX 4800 2.55
+32.8%
Quadro K420 1.92

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.

FX 4800 981
+32.4%
Quadro K420 741

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.55 1.92
Recency 11 November 2008 22 July 2014
Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 1 GB/2 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 41 Watt

FX 4800 has a 32.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Quadro K420, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 265.9% lower power consumption.

The Quadro FX 4800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K420 in performance tests.


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 Quadro FX 4800
Quadro FX 4800
NVIDIA Quadro K420
Quadro K420

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.


4.2 62 votes

Rate Quadro FX 4800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 143 votes

Rate Quadro K420 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.