UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) vs Quadro K4200

Place in the ranking	423	1015
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.32	no data
Power efficiency	7.17	9.55
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Gen. 11 (2021)
GPU code name	GK104	Gen. 11
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	22 July 2014 (10 years ago)	11 January 2021 (4 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 cores	1344	24
Core clock speed	771 MHz	350 MHz
Boost clock speed	784 MHz	800 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	108 Watt	4.8 - 10 Watt
Texture fill rate	87.81	no data
Floating-point processing power	2.107 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	no data
TMUs	112	no 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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	no data
Length	241 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no 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 type	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	no data
Memory bus width	256 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1350 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	172.8 GB/s	no 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 Connectors

1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort

no data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12_1
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	+	-
CUDA	3.0	-

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 HD

60−65
+650%

−650%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

14.25

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	7 +0%	7 +0%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Dota 2	6 +0%	6 +0%
Far Cry 5	8 +0%	8 +0%
Fortnite	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	6 +0%	6 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	3 +0%	3 +0%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
World of Tanks	18 +0%	18 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Dota 2	11 +0%	11 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
World of Tanks	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Valorant	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Valorant	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

This is how Quadro K4200 and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) compete in popular games:

Quadro K4200 is 650% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 44 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	11.11	1.37
Recency	22 July 2014	11 January 2021
Chip lithography	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	108 Watt	4 Watt

Quadro K4200 has a 710.9% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 2600% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K4200 is a workstation card while UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.