GeForce 8800M GTS vs Quadro K4200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
K2 K240Q K260Q K280Q K500 K520 K560Q Quadro 4100 Quadro K4200 Quadro K5000 Tesla K8 Tesla K10
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
8200M G 8200M G mGPU AMD 8200M G mGPU Intel 8400M G 8400M GS 8400M GT 8600M GS 8600M GT 8600M GT Mac Edition 8600M GT SLI 8700M GT 8700M GT SLI 8800M GTS 8800M GTX 8800M GTX SLI

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K4200 with GeForce 8800M GTS, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K4200
2014, $855
4 GB GDDR5, 108 Watt
10.26
+1027%

K4200 outperforms 8800M GTS by a whopping 1027% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Quadro K4200 Quadro K4200
8800M GTS 8800M GTS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4751175
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.93no data
Power efficiency7.361.41
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGK104G92
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date22 July 2014 (11 years ago)1 November 2007 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$854.99 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 cores134464
Core clock speed771 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed784 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 million754 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)108 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate87.8116.00
Floating-point processing power2.107 TFLOPS0.16 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs11232
L1 Cache112 KBno data
L2 Cache512 KB64 KB

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 2.0 x16MXM-HE
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1350 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth172.8 GB/s51.2 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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA3.01.1

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.

Quadro K4200 10.26
+1027%
8800M GTS 0.91

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 K4200 4331
+1034%
Samples: 1298
8800M GTS 382
Samples: 36

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

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 40 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 10.26 0.91
Recency 22 July 2014 1 November 2007
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 108 Watt 50 Watt

Quadro K4200 has a 1027.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

8800M GTS, on the other hand, has 116% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800M GTS in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K4200 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce 8800M GTS is a notebook 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 Quadro K4200
Quadro K4200
NVIDIA GeForce 8800M GTS
GeForce 8800M GTS
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Quadro K4200 Quadro K4200
vs
FirePro W7000 FirePro W7000
8800M GTS GeForce 8800M GTS
vs
GTS 350M GeForce GTS 350M
Quadro K4200 Quadro K4200
vs
Instinct MI25 Radeon Instinct MI25
Quadro K2200 K2200
vs
RX 6600 XT RX 6600 XT
Quadro K420 K420
vs
GTX 950 OEM GTX 950 OEM
Quadro K420 K420
vs
Iris Plus Graphics G7 Iris Plus Graphics G7
Quadro K420 K420
vs
Playstation 5 Pro GPU Playstation 5 Pro GPU
Quadro K4200 K4200
vs
FX 3800M FX 3800M
Quadro K4200 K4200
vs
FX 2700M FX 2700M
Quadro K4200 K4200
vs
GRID M10-8Q GRID M10-8Q
Quadro K4200 K4200
vs
Iris Plus Graphics 940 Iris Plus Graphics 940
Quadro K4200 K4200
vs
Iris Plus Graphics 950 Iris Plus Graphics 950
Quadro K4200 K4200
vs
UHD Graphics 910 UHD Graphics 910

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.7 188 votes

Rate Quadro K4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 19 votes

Rate GeForce 8800M GTS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K4200 or GeForce 8800M GTS, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.