Quadro K4200 vs Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) with Quadro K4200, including specs and performance data.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000)
2022
4.43

K4200 outperforms Graphics (Ryzen 7000) by a whopping 154% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking667421
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data2.20
Power efficiencyno data7.14
ArchitectureRDNA 2 (2022−2023)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameRaphaelGK104
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date26 September 2022 (2 years ago)22 July 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$854.99

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 cores1281344
Core clock speedno data771 MHz
Boost clock speed2200 MHz784 MHz
Number of transistorsno data3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data108 Watt
Texture fill rateno data87.81
Floating-point processing powerno data2.107 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data112

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data241 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1350 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data172.8 GB/s
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 Connectorsno data1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_212 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
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 HD17
−135%
40−45
+135%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data21.37

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−150%
30−33
+150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−150%
30−33
+150%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−150%
65−70
+150%
Hitman 3 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−141%
70−75
+141%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−150%
40−45
+150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−150%
110−120
+150%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−150%
30−33
+150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−150%
30−33
+150%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−150%
65−70
+150%
Hitman 3 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−141%
70−75
+141%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
−145%
27−30
+145%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−135%
40−45
+135%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−150%
110−120
+150%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−150%
30−33
+150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−150%
65−70
+150%
Hitman 3 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9
−133%
21−24
+133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9
−133%
21−24
+133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−135%
40−45
+135%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−150%
110−120
+150%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%
Hitman 3 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−141%
65−70
+141%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Hitman 3 0−1 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%

This is how Graphics (Ryzen 7000) and Quadro K4200 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro K4200 is 135% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.43 11.24
Recency 26 September 2022 22 July 2014
Chip lithography 6 nm 28 nm

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) has an age advantage of 8 years, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro K4200, on the other hand, has a 153.7% higher aggregate performance score.

The Quadro K4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) is a notebook card while Quadro K4200 is a workstation 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.


AMD Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000)
Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000)
NVIDIA Quadro K4200
Quadro K4200

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.


3.3 243 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 161 vote

Rate Quadro K4200 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.