Quadro P4200 vs Radeon Pro W6600X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro W6600X with Quadro P4200, including specs and performance data.

Pro W6600X
2021
8 GB GDDR6, 120 Watt
30.37
+35.2%

Pro W6600X outperforms P4200 by a substantial 35% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking186252
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation20.58no data
Power efficiency19.7217.50
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameNavi 23GP104
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date3 August 2021 (3 years ago)21 February 2018 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$699 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

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 cores20482304
Core clock speed2068 MHz1227 MHz
Boost clock speed2479 MHz1647 MHz
Number of transistors11,060 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate317.3237.2
Floating-point processing power10.15 TFLOPS7.589 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs128144
Ray Tracing Cores32no 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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8MXM-B (3.0)
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth256.0 GB/s192.3 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR+-

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 outputsNo 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.

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.76.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.11.2
Vulkan1.31.2.131
CUDA-6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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.

Pro W6600X 30.37
+35.2%
Quadro P4200 22.46

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.

Pro W6600X 13113
+25.2%
Quadro P4200 10470

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 Preset

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Sons of the Forest 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Sons of the Forest 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Sons of the Forest 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Sons of the Forest 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Sons of the Forest 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+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%
Dota 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Sons of the Forest 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 65 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 30.37 22.46
Recency 3 August 2021 21 February 2018
Chip lithography 7 nm 16 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 100 Watt

Pro W6600X has a 35.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro P4200, on the other hand, has 20% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro W6600X is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P4200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro W6600X is a workstation graphics card while Quadro P4200 is a mobile workstation 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.


AMD Radeon Pro W6600X
Radeon Pro W6600X
NVIDIA Quadro P4200
Quadro P4200

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon Pro W6600X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 60 votes

Rate Quadro P4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro W6600X or Quadro P4200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.