Radeon PRO WX 2100 vs Quadro K4200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K4200 and Radeon PRO WX 2100, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro K4200
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 108 Watt
9.79
+131%

K4200 outperforms PRO 2100 by a whopping 131% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking469690
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.890.95
Power efficiency7.309.73
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGK104Lexa
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date22 July 2014 (11 years ago)4 June 2017 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$854.99 $149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

PRO WX 2100 has 7% better value for money than Quadro K4200.

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 cores1344512
Core clock speed771 MHz925 MHz
Boost clock speed784 MHz1219 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)108 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate87.8139.01
Floating-point processing power2.107 TFLOPS1.248 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs11232
L1 Cache112 KB128 KB
L2 Cache512 KB256 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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length241 mm168 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1350 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth172.8 GB/s48 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 DisplayPort1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA3.0-

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 9.79
+131%
PRO WX 2100 4.23

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 4329
+132%
Samples: 1254
PRO WX 2100 1869
Samples: 223

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

Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.79 4.23
Recency 22 July 2014 4 June 2017
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 108 Watt 35 Watt

Quadro K4200 has a 131.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

PRO WX 2100, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 208.6% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO WX 2100 in performance tests.

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
AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100
Radeon PRO WX 2100

Other comparisons

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.


3.7 186 votes

Rate Quadro K4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 54 votes

Rate Radeon PRO WX 2100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K4200 or Radeon PRO WX 2100, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.