Quadro P4200 vs Quadro K1000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K1000M and Quadro P4200, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

K1000M
2012
2 GB DDR3, 45 Watt
2.02

P4200 outperforms K1000M by a whopping 1146% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking890213
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.49no data
Power efficiency3.0817.25
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGK107GP104
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date1 June 2012 (12 years ago)21 February 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$119.90 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1922304
Core clock speed850 MHz1227 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1647 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate13.60237.2
Floating-point processing power0.3264 TFLOPS7.589 TFLOPS
ROPs1664
TMUs16144

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
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)MXM-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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.8 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 compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

K1000M 2.02
Quadro P4200 25.17
+1146%

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.

K1000M 777
Quadro P4200 10491
+1250%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

K1000M 1739
Quadro P4200 38375
+2107%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

K1000M 1335
Quadro P4200 37676
+2722%

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:

900p9
−1122%
110−120
+1122%
Full HD16
−1088%
190−200
+1088%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.49no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−925%
40−45
+925%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−686%
55−60
+686%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−8100%
80−85
+8100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−920%
50−55
+920%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−925%
40−45
+925%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−1833%
55−60
+1833%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−1220%
65−70
+1220%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−1725%
140−150
+1725%
Hitman 3 7−8
−629%
50−55
+629%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−544%
110−120
+544%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1525%
65−70
+1525%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−750%
85−90
+750%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−194%
100−110
+194%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−686%
55−60
+686%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−8100%
80−85
+8100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−920%
50−55
+920%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−925%
40−45
+925%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−1833%
55−60
+1833%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−1220%
65−70
+1220%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−1725%
140−150
+1725%
Hitman 3 7−8
−629%
50−55
+629%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−544%
110−120
+544%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1525%
65−70
+1525%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−750%
85−90
+750%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−350%
50−55
+350%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−194%
100−110
+194%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−686%
55−60
+686%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−920%
50−55
+920%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−925%
40−45
+925%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−1833%
55−60
+1833%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−1725%
140−150
+1725%
Hitman 3 7−8
−629%
50−55
+629%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−544%
110−120
+544%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−750%
85−90
+750%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−350%
50−55
+350%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−194%
100−110
+194%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1525%
65−70
+1525%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−1500%
45−50
+1500%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−1167%
35−40
+1167%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−1200%
24−27
+1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−2800%
27−30
+2800%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−1350%
27−30
+1350%
Hitman 3 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−767%
50−55
+767%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−3000%
30−35
+3000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−1191%
140−150
+1191%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−740%
40−45
+740%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1900%
20−22
+1900%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−650%
14−16
+650%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 14−16
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 10−12

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−633%
21−24
+633%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hitman 3 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

This is how K1000M and Quadro P4200 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P4200 is 1122% faster in 900p
  • Quadro P4200 is 1088% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro P4200 is 8100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro P4200 is ahead in 53 tests (76%)
  • there's a draw in 17 tests (24%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.02 25.17
Recency 1 June 2012 21 February 2018
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 16 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 100 Watt

K1000M has 122.2% lower power consumption.

Quadro P4200, on the other hand, has a 1146% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K1000M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


NVIDIA Quadro K1000M
Quadro K1000M
NVIDIA Quadro P4200
Quadro P4200

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.7 82 votes

Rate Quadro K1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 57 votes

Rate Quadro P4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.