P106-090 vs Quadro K4200

Aggregate performance score

Quadro K4200
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 108 Watt
11.19
+84.7%

Quadro K4200 outperforms P106-090 by an impressive 85% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking389553
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.643.56
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGK104GP106
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date22 July 2014 (9 years ago)31 July 2017 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$854.99 no data
Current price$311 (0.4x MSRP)$26

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro K4200 has 30% better value for money than P106-090.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1344768
Core clock speed771 MHz1354 MHz
Boost clock speed784 MHz1531 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million4,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)108 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate87.8173.49
Floating-point performance2,107 gflops2,352 gflops

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 3.0 x16
Length241 mm250 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1x 6-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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB3 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed5400 MHz8008 MHz
Memory bandwidth172.8 GB/s192.2 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 DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA3.06.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 K4200 11.19
+84.7%
P106-090 6.06

Quadro K4200 outperforms P106-090 by 85% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Quadro K4200 4322
+84.5%
P106-090 2342

Quadro K4200 outperforms P106-090 by 85% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

Quadro K4200 11883
P106-090 20977
+76.5%

P106-090 outperforms Quadro K4200 by 77% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Quadro K4200 12315
P106-090 18747
+52.2%

P106-090 outperforms Quadro K4200 by 52% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

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 11.19 6.06
Recency 22 July 2014 31 July 2017
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 3 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 16 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 108 Watt 75 Watt

The Quadro K4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the P106-090 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K4200 is a workstation graphics card while P106-090 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 P106-090
P106-090

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.


3.7 141 vote

Rate Quadro K4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 48 votes

Rate P106-090 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.