Quadro P4200 vs HD Graphics 4200
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics 4200 with Quadro P4200, including specs and performance data.
P4200 outperforms HD Graphics 4200 by a whopping 2448% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1110 | 216 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 17.04 | 17.37 |
| Architecture | Generation 7.5 (2013) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | Haswell GT2 | GP104 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 2 September 2013 (11 years ago) | 21 February 2018 (6 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 | 160 | 2304 |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | 1227 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 850 MHz | 1647 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 392 million | 7,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm | 16 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 4 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 17.00 | 237.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.272 TFLOPS | 7.589 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 2 | 64 |
| TMUs | 20 | 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 | no data | large |
| Interface | Ring Bus | 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 | System Shared | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 1502 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 192.3 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 Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | - | + |
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 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 | 8
−2400%
| 200−210
+2400%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−422%
|
45−50
+422%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1600%
|
50−55
+1600%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−422%
|
45−50
+422%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1600%
|
50−55
+1600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−1486%
|
110−120
+1486%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
−817%
|
55−60
+817%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−422%
|
45−50
+422%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1600%
|
50−55
+1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
−756%
|
75−80
+756%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−4100%
|
120−130
+4100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−1486%
|
110−120
+1486%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−1217%
|
150−160
+1217%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
−817%
|
55−60
+817%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−1267%
|
80−85
+1267%
|
| World of Tanks | 13
−1892%
|
250−260
+1892%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−422%
|
45−50
+422%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1600%
|
50−55
+1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
−756%
|
75−80
+756%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−1486%
|
110−120
+1486%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−1217%
|
150−160
+1217%
|
1440p
High Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
−3400%
|
170−180
+3400%
|
| World of Tanks | 5−6
−3240%
|
160−170
+3240%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−144%
|
21−24
+144%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−950%
|
21−24
+950%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−1380%
|
70−75
+1380%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−1750%
|
35−40
+1750%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−1033%
|
65−70
+1033%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−193%
|
40−45
+193%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−193%
|
40−45
+193%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−2467%
|
75−80
+2467%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 16−18 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−193%
|
40−45
+193%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−2500%
|
24−27
+2500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−700%
|
8−9
+700%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−193%
|
40−45
+193%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 30−35 |
| Valorant | 1−2
−3200%
|
30−35
+3200%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Elden Ring | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Elden Ring | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Elden Ring | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Elden Ring | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
This is how HD Graphics 4200 and Quadro P4200 compete in popular games:
- Quadro P4200 is 2400% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro P4200 is 4100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Quadro P4200 is ahead in 35 tests (57%)
- there's a draw in 26 tests (43%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.99 | 25.23 |
| Recency | 2 September 2013 | 21 February 2018 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 16 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 4 Watt | 100 Watt |
HD Graphics 4200 has 2400% lower power consumption.
Quadro P4200, on the other hand, has a 2448.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.
The Quadro P4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 4200 in performance tests.
Be aware that HD Graphics 4200 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro P4200 is a mobile workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
