Quadro K420 vs Quadro P1000

Place in the ranking	417	910
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	5.62	0.08
Power efficiency	20.03	3.22
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	GP107	GK107
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	7 February 2017 (7 years ago)	22 July 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$375	$96.67

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

Quadro P1000 has 6925% better value for money than Quadro K420.

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	640	192
Core clock speed	1493 MHz	876 MHz
Boost clock speed	1519 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	3,300 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	41 Watt
Texture fill rate	48.61	14.02
Floating-point processing power	1.555 TFLOPS	0.3364 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	32	16

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	145 mm	160 mm
Width	MXM Module	1" (2.5 cm)
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR5	128 Bit
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB/2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1502 MHz	891 MHz
Memory bandwidth	96.13 GB/s	Up to 29 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 Connectors	Portable Device Dependent	1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displays	no data	4

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus	+	-
3D Vision Pro	no data	+
Mosaic	no data	+
nView Desktop Management	no data	+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12
Shader Model	6.7	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	3.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.3	1.1.126
CUDA	6.1	3.0

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.

Quadro P1000 11.11
+507%

Quadro K420 1.83

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 4475
+506%

Quadro K420 739

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.

Quadro P1000 14375
+678%

Quadro K420 1847

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Quadro P1000 13330
+625%

Quadro K420 1839

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Quadro P1000 14286
+958%

Quadro K420 1350

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	46 +557%	7−8 −557%
4K	11 +1000%	1−2 −1000%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	8.15 +69.4%	13.81 −69.4%
4K	34.09 +184%	96.67 −184%

Quadro P1000 has 69% lower cost per frame in 1080p
Quadro P1000 has 184% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +567%	3−4 −567%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +667%	3−4 −667%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +533%	6−7 −533%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +567%	3−4 −567%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +667%	3−4 −667%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +571%	7−8 −571%
Forza Horizon 5	30−33 +650%	4−5 −650%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +540%	5−6 −540%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−33 +650%	4−5 −650%
Valorant	45−50 +557%	7−8 −557%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +533%	6−7 −533%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +567%	3−4 −567%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +667%	3−4 −667%
Dota 2	40−45 +600%	6−7 −600%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +557%	7−8 −557%
Fortnite	41 +583%	6−7 −583%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +571%	7−8 −571%
Forza Horizon 5	30−33 +650%	4−5 −650%
Grand Theft Auto V	40−45 +600%	6−7 −600%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +540%	5−6 −540%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	103 +544%	16−18 −544%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−33 +650%	4−5 −650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +600%	5−6 −600%
Valorant	45−50 +557%	7−8 −557%
World of Tanks	160−170 +575%	24−27 −575%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +533%	6−7 −533%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +567%	3−4 −567%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +667%	3−4 −667%
Dota 2	40−45 +600%	6−7 −600%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +557%	7−8 −557%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +571%	7−8 −571%
Forza Horizon 5	30−33 +650%	4−5 −650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	85−90 +529%	14−16 −529%
Valorant	45−50 +557%	7−8 −557%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	85−90 +514%	14−16 −514%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
World of Tanks	80−85 +592%	12−14 −592%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +667%	3−4 −667%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +575%	4−5 −575%
Forza Horizon 5	18−20 +800%	2−3 −800%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +700%	3−4 −700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Valorant	27−30 +625%	4−5 −625%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Dota 2	21−24 +633%	3−4 −633%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 +633%	3−4 −633%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +580%	5−6 −580%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +633%	3−4 −633%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4	0−1
Dota 2	21−24 +633%	3−4 −633%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Fortnite	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Forza Horizon 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Valorant	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%

This is how Quadro P1000 and Quadro K420 compete in popular games:

Quadro P1000 is 557% faster in 1080p
Quadro P1000 is 1000% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	11.11	1.83
Recency	7 February 2017	22 July 2014
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB/2 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	41 Watt

Quadro P1000 has a 507.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 2.5% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P1000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K420 in performance tests.

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