GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile vs Quadro P4200
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro P4200 with GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
P4200 outperforms GTX 1050 Mobile by a whopping 117% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 222 | 423 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 17.39 | 10.67 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | GP104 | GP107B |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 21 February 2018 (6 years ago) | 3 January 2017 (8 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 | 2304 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 1227 MHz | 1354 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1647 MHz | 1493 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 7,200 million | 3,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 97 °C |
| Texture fill rate | 237.2 | 59.72 |
| Floating-point processing power | 7.589 TFLOPS | 1.911 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 16 |
| TMUs | 144 | 40 |
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 | large | large |
| Bus support | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4000 MB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1502 MHz | 7008 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 192.3 GB/s | 112 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 | No outputs | DP 1.4, HDMI 2.0b, Dual Link-DVI |
| Multi monitor support | no data | + |
| HDCP | - | 2.2 |
| G-SYNC support | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| GameStream | - | + |
| GPU Boost | no data | 3.0 |
| Optimus | + | - |
| Ansel | no data | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 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:
| 900p | 150−160
+105%
| 73
−105%
|
| Full HD | 95−100
+107%
| 46
−107%
|
| 1440p | 50−55
+108%
| 24
−108%
|
| 4K | 30−35
+100%
| 15
−100%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+124%
|
21−24
−124%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 50−55
+143%
|
21−24
−143%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+51%
|
51
−51%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+124%
|
21−24
−124%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 50−55
+143%
|
21−24
−143%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+102%
|
55
−102%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 65−70
+123%
|
30−33
−123%
|
| Metro Exodus | 65−70
+120%
|
30−33
−120%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 55−60
+104%
|
27
−104%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+124%
|
45−50
−124%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+75%
|
44
−75%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+124%
|
21−24
−124%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 50−55
+143%
|
21−24
−143%
|
| Dota 2 | 85−90
−44.8%
|
126
+44.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 75−80
+114%
|
36
−114%
|
| Fortnite | 120−130
+147%
|
51
−147%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+113%
|
52
−113%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 65−70
+123%
|
30−33
−123%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 85−90
+105%
|
42
−105%
|
| Metro Exodus | 65−70
+247%
|
19
−247%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 150−160
+285%
|
41
−285%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 55−60
+293%
|
14
−293%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 80−85
+110%
|
39
−110%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+124%
|
45−50
−124%
|
| World of Tanks | 250−260
+60.9%
|
160−170
−60.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+108%
|
37
−108%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+124%
|
21−24
−124%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 50−55
+143%
|
21−24
−143%
|
| Dota 2 | 85−90
−32.2%
|
115
+32.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 75−80
+133%
|
33
−133%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+200%
|
37
−200%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 65−70
+123%
|
30−33
−123%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 150−160
+445%
|
29
−445%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+124%
|
45−50
−124%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+133%
|
9−10
−133%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
+139%
|
18−20
−139%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 40−45
+169%
|
16−18
−169%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+119%
|
80−85
−119%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 21−24
+130%
|
10−11
−130%
|
| World of Tanks | 160−170
+123%
|
75−80
−123%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+96.2%
|
26
−96.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+133%
|
9−10
−133%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 70−75
+252%
|
21
−252%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+158%
|
26
−158%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 40−45
+122%
|
18−20
−122%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55−60
+142%
|
24−27
−142%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 35−40
+138%
|
16−18
−138%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
+127%
|
30−33
−127%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+120%
|
5−6
−120%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
+144%
|
18−20
−144%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 40−45
+100%
|
21−24
−100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 20−22
+186%
|
7
−186%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 75−80
+120%
|
35−40
−120%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 16−18
+129%
|
7−8
−129%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
+100%
|
21−24
−100%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+100%
|
13
−100%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+120%
|
5−6
−120%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
+29.4%
|
34
−29.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+209%
|
11
−209%
|
| Fortnite | 30−35
+121%
|
14−16
−121%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+160%
|
15
−160%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 21−24
+133%
|
9−10
−133%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+136%
|
14−16
−136%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 39
+0%
|
39
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 132
+0%
|
132
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 46
+0%
|
46
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 22
+0%
|
22
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 39
+0%
|
39
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Metro Exodus | 11
+0%
|
11
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 25
+0%
|
25
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12
+0%
|
12
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 10
+0%
|
10
+0%
|
This is how Quadro P4200 and GTX 1050 Mobile compete in popular games:
- Quadro P4200 is 105% faster in 900p
- Quadro P4200 is 107% faster in 1080p
- Quadro P4200 is 108% faster in 1440p
- Quadro P4200 is 100% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P4200 is 445% faster.
- in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1050 Mobile is 45% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Quadro P4200 is ahead in 30 tests (73%)
- GTX 1050 Mobile is ahead in 2 tests (5%)
- there's a draw in 9 tests (22%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 24.43 | 11.24 |
| Recency | 21 February 2018 | 3 January 2017 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4000 MB |
| Chip lithography | 16 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 75 Watt |
Quadro P4200 has a 117.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 104.8% higher maximum VRAM amount.
GTX 1050 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 33.3% lower power consumption.
The Quadro P4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro P4200 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
