Quadro P4200 vs Radeon HD 7640G + HD 7610M Dual Graphics
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 7640G + HD 7610M Dual Graphics with Quadro P4200, including specs and performance data.
P4200 outperforms HD 7640G + HD 7610M Dual Graphics by a whopping 1432% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 995 | 254 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 17.64 |
| Architecture | Terascale 3 (2010−2013) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | no data | GP104 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 15 May 2012 (13 years ago) | 21 February 2018 (7 years ago) |
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 | 656 | 2304 |
| Core clock speed | 655 / 450 MHz | 1227 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1647 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 7,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 16 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 100 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 237.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 7.589 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 64 |
| TMUs | no data | 144 |
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).
| Laptop size | medium sized | large |
| Interface | no data | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | no data | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1502 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 192.3 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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | - | 6.1 |
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 | 34
−1371%
| 500−550
+1371%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 130−140 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1600%
|
50−55
+1600%
|
| God of War | 6−7
−733%
|
50−55
+733%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
−3033%
|
90−95
+3033%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 130−140 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1600%
|
50−55
+1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−2467%
|
75−80
+2467%
|
| Fortnite | 5−6
−2240%
|
110−120
+2240%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−944%
|
90−95
+944%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−7300%
|
70−75
+7300%
|
| God of War | 6−7
−733%
|
50−55
+733%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−820%
|
90−95
+820%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−369%
|
160−170
+369%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
−3033%
|
90−95
+3033%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 130−140 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−35
−673%
|
250−260
+673%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1600%
|
50−55
+1600%
|
| Dota 2 | 18−20
−572%
|
120−130
+572%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−2467%
|
75−80
+2467%
|
| Fortnite | 5−6
−2240%
|
110−120
+2240%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−944%
|
90−95
+944%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−7300%
|
70−75
+7300%
|
| God of War | 6−7
−733%
|
50−55
+733%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
−4200%
|
85−90
+4200%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
−2500%
|
50−55
+2500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−820%
|
90−95
+820%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−900%
|
70−75
+900%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−369%
|
160−170
+369%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
−3033%
|
90−95
+3033%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1600%
|
50−55
+1600%
|
| Dota 2 | 18−20
−572%
|
120−130
+572%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−2467%
|
75−80
+2467%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−944%
|
90−95
+944%
|
| God of War | 6−7
−733%
|
50−55
+733%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−820%
|
90−95
+820%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−900%
|
70−75
+900%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−369%
|
160−170
+369%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 5−6
−2240%
|
110−120
+2240%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−1150%
|
50−55
+1150%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 10−11
−1580%
|
160−170
+1580%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
−1067%
|
170−180
+1067%
|
| Valorant | 8−9
−2425%
|
200−210
+2425%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 21−24 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−5300%
|
50−55
+5300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| God of War | 0−1 | 27−30 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−3700%
|
35−40
+3700%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−1767%
|
55−60
+1767%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−193%
|
40−45
+193%
|
| Valorant | 8−9
−1625%
|
130−140
+1625%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 2−3
−3800%
|
75−80
+3800%
|
| God of War | 1−2
−1800%
|
18−20
+1800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−1150%
|
24−27
+1150%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1200%
|
24−27
+1200%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
This is how HD 7640G + HD 7610M Dual Graphics and Quadro P4200 compete in popular games:
- Quadro P4200 is 1371% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro P4200 is 7300% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Quadro P4200 is ahead in 49 tests (82%)
- there's a draw in 11 tests (18%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.51 | 23.14 |
| Recency | 15 May 2012 | 21 February 2018 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 16 nm |
Quadro P4200 has a 1432.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.
The Quadro P4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7640G + HD 7610M Dual Graphics in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 7640G + HD 7610M Dual Graphics is a notebook graphics card while Quadro P4200 is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
