GeForce GT 520 OEM vs Quadro K4200

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking421not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.20no data
Power efficiency7.14no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGK104GF119
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date22 July 2014 (10 years ago)20 August 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$854.99 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 cores134496
Core clock speed771 MHz589 MHz
Boost clock speed784 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)108 Watt29 Watt
Texture fill rate87.819.424
Floating-point processing power2.107 TFLOPS0.2692 TFLOPS
ROPs324
TMUs11216

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
Length241 mm145 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1350 MHz500 MHz
Memory bandwidth172.8 GB/s8 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 DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA3.02.1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 22 July 2014 20 August 2012
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 108 Watt 29 Watt

Quadro K4200 has an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 520 OEM, on the other hand, has 272.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro K4200 and GeForce GT 520 OEM. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro K4200 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GT 520 OEM is a desktop one.


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 K4200
Quadro K4200
NVIDIA GeForce GT 520 OEM
GeForce GT 520 OEM

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.


3.7 161 vote

Rate Quadro K4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 28 votes

Rate GeForce GT 520 OEM 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.