GeForce4 MX 420 vs Quadro P1000

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P1000 with GeForce4 MX 420, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P1000
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 40 Watt
11.23
+112200%

P1000 outperforms GeForce4 MX 420 by a whopping 112200% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4301531
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.84no data
Power efficiency19.86no data
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Celsius (1999−2005)
GPU code nameGP107NV17 A3
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date7 February 2017 (8 years ago)6 February 2002 (23 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$375 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

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 cores640no data
Core clock speed1493 MHz250 MHz
Boost clock speed1519 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,300 million29 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)40 Wattno data
Texture fill rate48.611.000
Floating-point processing power1.555 TFLOPSno data
ROPs162
TMUs324

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16AGP 4x
Length145 mmno data
WidthMXM Module1-slot
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 typeGDDR5SDR
Maximum RAM amount4 GB64 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz166 MHz
Memory bandwidth96.13 GB/s1.328 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x VGA, 1x S-Video

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 (12_1)8.0
Shader Model6.7no data
OpenGL4.61.3
OpenCL3.0N/A
Vulkan1.3N/A
CUDA6.1-

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.

Quadro P1000 11.23
+112200%
GeForce4 MX 420 0.01

  • Passmark

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.

Quadro P1000 4488
+112100%
GeForce4 MX 420 4

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 HD44-0−1
4K11-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p8.52no data
4K34.09no data

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Counter-Strike 2 55−60 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 20−22 0−1
Battlefield 5 45−50 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 55−60 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Far Cry 5 32 0−1
Fortnite 65−70 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 45−50 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 30−35 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 20−22 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40 0−1
Valorant 100−105 0−1
Battlefield 5 45−50 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 55−60 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Dota 2 75−80 0−1
Far Cry 5 29 0−1
Fortnite 65−70 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 45−50 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 30−35 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 20−22 0−1
Metro Exodus 21−24 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30 0−1
Valorant 100−105 0−1
Battlefield 5 45−50 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Dota 2 75−80 0−1
Far Cry 5 27 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 45−50 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 20−22 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16 0−1
Valorant 100−105 0−1
Fortnite 65−70 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 20−22 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 80−85 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18 0−1
Metro Exodus 12−14 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75 0−1
Valorant 120−130 0−1
Battlefield 5 27−30 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 0−1
Far Cry 5 21−24 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 24−27 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18 0−1
Fortnite 21−24 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 5−6 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7 0−1
Metro Exodus 7−8 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14 0−1
Valorant 55−60 0−1
Battlefield 5 14−16 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Dota 2 40−45 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−12 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 18−20 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11 0−1
Fortnite 10−11 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.23 0.01
Recency 7 February 2017 6 February 2002
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 64 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 150 nm

Quadro P1000 has a 112200% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 971.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P1000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce4 MX 420 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P1000 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce4 MX 420 is a desktop 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.


NVIDIA Quadro P1000
Quadro P1000
NVIDIA GeForce4 MX 420
GeForce4 MX 420

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.


3.5
597 votes

Rate Quadro P1000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4
23 votes

Rate GeForce4 MX 420 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P1000 or GeForce4 MX 420, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.