Quadro P4200 vs ATI Mobility FireGL V5700

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Mobility FireGL V5700 and Quadro P4200, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI Mobility FireGL V5700
2008
512 MB GDDR3
0.35

P4200 outperforms ATI Mobility FireGL V5700 by a whopping 7109% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1304225
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data17.29
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameM86GP104
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date7 January 2008 (17 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 cores1202304
Core clock speed600 MHz1227 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1647 MHz
Number of transistors378 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data100 Watt
Texture fill rate4.800237.2
Floating-point processing power0.144 TFLOPS7.589 TFLOPS
ROPs464
TMUs8144

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth22.4 GB/s192.3 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 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.

DirectX10.1 (10_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
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.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−3150%
65−70
+3150%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−557%
45−50
+557%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−5000%
50−55
+5000%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−3150%
65−70
+3150%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−557%
45−50
+557%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−5000%
50−55
+5000%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−3033%
90−95
+3033%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1214%
90−95
+1214%
Valorant 24−27
−527%
160−170
+527%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−3150%
65−70
+3150%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−557%
45−50
+557%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
−1721%
250−260
+1721%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−5000%
50−55
+5000%
Dota 2 10−11
−1110%
120−130
+1110%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−3033%
90−95
+3033%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1214%
90−95
+1214%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1675%
70−75
+1675%
Valorant 24−27
−527%
160−170
+527%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−557%
45−50
+557%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−5000%
50−55
+5000%
Dota 2 10−11
−1110%
120−130
+1110%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−3033%
90−95
+3033%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1214%
90−95
+1214%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1675%
70−75
+1675%
Valorant 24−27
−527%
160−170
+527%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−8650%
170−180
+8650%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 21−24
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−6000%
60−65
+6000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−3800%
35−40
+3800%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 0−1 55−60

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 18−20
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−193%
40−45
+193%
Valorant 2−3
−6800%
130−140
+6800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−1150%
24−27
+1150%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−1200%
24−27
+1200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+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%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+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 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro P4200 is 8650% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro P4200 is ahead in 33 tests (52%)
  • there's a draw in 31 test (48%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.35 25.23
Recency 7 January 2008 21 February 2018
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 16 nm

Quadro P4200 has a 7108.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 243.8% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility FireGL V5700 in performance tests.

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.


ATI Mobility FireGL V5700
Mobility FireGL V5700
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.


5 1 vote

Rate Mobility FireGL V5700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 58 votes

Rate Quadro P4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Mobility FireGL V5700 or Quadro P4200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.