Quadro T1000 vs Quadro K4200

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K4200 and Quadro T1000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro K4200
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 108 Watt
11.24

T1000 outperforms K4200 by a considerable 49% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking421324
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.20no data
Power efficiency7.1323.01
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGK104TU117
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date22 July 2014 (10 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 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 cores1344no data
Core clock speed771 MHz1395 MHz
Boost clock speed784 MHz1455 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)108 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate87.81no data
Floating-point processing power2.107 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs112no data

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 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1350 MHz8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth172.8 GB/sno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12.0 (12_1)
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA3.0-

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.

Quadro K4200 11.24
Quadro T1000 16.78
+49.3%

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
Quadro T1000 6467
+49.3%

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.

Quadro K4200 12072
Quadro T1000 33876
+181%

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.

Quadro K4200 12388
Quadro T1000 30130
+143%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Quadro K4200 8946
Quadro T1000 34236
+283%

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 11.24 16.78
Recency 22 July 2014 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 108 Watt 50 Watt

Quadro T1000 has a 49.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 116% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T1000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K4200 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 K4200
Quadro K4200
NVIDIA Quadro T1000
Quadro T1000

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.


3.7 160 votes

Rate Quadro K4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 407 votes

Rate Quadro T1000 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.