UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) vs Quadro K4200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K4200 with UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake), including specs and performance data.

Quadro K4200
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 108 Watt
11.14

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) outperforms K4200 by a significant 25% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking430380
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.47no data
Power efficiency7.1664.37
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)no data
GPU code nameGK104Rocket Lake GT1
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date22 July 2014 (10 years ago)30 March 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$854.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 MHzno data
Boost clock speed784 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)108 Watt15 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 x16no data
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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1350 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth172.8 GB/sno data
Shared memory--

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 data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)no data
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA3.0-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD10−12
−30%
13
+30%

Cost per frame, $

1080p85.50no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 9
+0%
9
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Dota 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Far Cry 5 8
+0%
8
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6
+0%
6
+0%
Metro Exodus 7
+0%
7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Dota 2 25
+0%
25
+0%
Far Cry 5 8
+0%
8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

This is how Quadro K4200 and UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is 30% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.14 13.91
Recency 22 July 2014 30 March 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 108 Watt 15 Watt

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) has a 24.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 620% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K4200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K4200 is a workstation card while UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) 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
Intel UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)
UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)

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.


3.7 163 votes

Rate Quadro K4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 115 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K4200 or UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.