RTX A5000 Mobile vs NVS 4200M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared NVS 4200M and RTX A5000 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RTX A5000 Mobile outperforms NVS 4200M by a whopping 5145% 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 | 1197 | 128 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.17 | 19.08 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | GF119 | GA104 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 22 February 2011 (14 years ago) | 12 April 2021 (4 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 | 48 | 6144 |
| Core clock speed | 810 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1575 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 292 million | 17,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 6.480 | 302.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1555 TFLOPS | 19.35 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 96 |
| TMUs | 8 | 192 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 192 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 48 |
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 | MXM | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
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 | DDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 12.8 GB/s | 448.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| CUDA | 2.1 | 8.6 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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.
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.
3DMark 11 Performance GPU
3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.
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 | 13
−715%
| 106
+715%
|
| 1440p | 1−2
−6700%
| 68
+6700%
|
| 4K | 0−1 | 48 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−8700%
|
85−90
+8700%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−8700%
|
85−90
+8700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−9200%
|
93
+9200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2840%
|
140−150
+2840%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1775%
|
150−160
+1775%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−669%
|
220−230
+669%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 20−22
−1280%
|
270−280
+1280%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−8700%
|
85−90
+8700%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−915%
|
132
+915%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−8900%
|
90
+8900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2840%
|
140−150
+2840%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−7900%
|
80
+7900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1775%
|
150−160
+1775%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−2400%
|
150
+2400%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−669%
|
220−230
+669%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−8700%
|
85−90
+8700%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−854%
|
124
+854%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−8400%
|
85
+8400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2840%
|
140−150
+2840%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1775%
|
150−160
+1775%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−1400%
|
90
+1400%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−669%
|
220−230
+669%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
−9500%
|
95−100
+9500%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 3−4
−8733%
|
260−270
+8733%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−2400%
|
170−180
+2400%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−5300%
|
100−110
+5300%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
−9900%
|
100−105
+9900%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−407%
|
76
+407%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−5700%
|
230−240
+5700%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−2450%
|
50−55
+2450%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−2350%
|
45−50
+2350%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 122
+0%
|
122
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 82
+0%
|
82
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 44
+0%
|
44
+0%
|
| Valorant | 250−260
+0%
|
250−260
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 79
+0%
|
79
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 26
+0%
|
26
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 58
+0%
|
58
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 107
+0%
|
107
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 44
+0%
|
44
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
This is how NVS 4200M and RTX A5000 Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX A5000 Mobile is 715% faster in 1080p
- RTX A5000 Mobile is 6700% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1440p resolution and the Epic Preset, the RTX A5000 Mobile is 9900% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX A5000 Mobile is ahead in 31 tests (48%)
- there's a draw in 34 tests (52%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.71 | 37.24 |
| Recency | 22 February 2011 | 12 April 2021 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 16 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 150 Watt |
NVS 4200M has 500% lower power consumption.
RTX A5000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 5145.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 400% more advanced lithography process.
The RTX A5000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 4200M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
