Quadro P4200 vs Quadro P5200
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro P5200 and Quadro P4200, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
P5200 outperforms P4200 by a significant 25% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 187 | 225 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 21.55 | 17.30 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | GP104 | GP104 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 21 February 2018 (7 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 cores | 2560 | 2304 |
| Core clock speed | 1556 MHz | 1227 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1746 MHz | 1647 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 7,200 million | 7,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 16 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 279.4 | 237.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | 8.94 TFLOPS | 7.589 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 160 | 144 |
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 |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | MXM-B (3.0) |
| 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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1502 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 230.4 GB/s | 192.3 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 Connectors | No outputs | No 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.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | 6.1 | 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 | 120
+26.3%
| 95−100
−26.3%
|
| 4K | 48
+37.1%
| 35−40
−37.1%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 80−85
+29.2%
|
65−70
−29.2%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+32.6%
|
45−50
−32.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+27.5%
|
50−55
−27.5%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 80−85
+29.2%
|
65−70
−29.2%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+17%
|
90−95
−17%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+32.6%
|
45−50
−32.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+27.5%
|
50−55
−27.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+21.5%
|
75−80
−21.5%
|
| Fortnite | 130−140
+16.2%
|
110−120
−16.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+22.3%
|
90−95
−22.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 85−90
+26.9%
|
65−70
−26.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 110−120
+27.2%
|
90−95
−27.2%
|
| Valorant | 180−190
+14.7%
|
160−170
−14.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 80−85
+29.2%
|
65−70
−29.2%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+17%
|
90−95
−17%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+32.6%
|
45−50
−32.6%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+7.1%
|
250−260
−7.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+27.5%
|
50−55
−27.5%
|
| Dota 2 | 130−140
+9.9%
|
120−130
−9.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+21.5%
|
75−80
−21.5%
|
| Fortnite | 130−140
+16.2%
|
110−120
−16.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+22.3%
|
90−95
−22.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 85−90
+26.9%
|
65−70
−26.9%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 100−110
+20.9%
|
85−90
−20.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 65−70
+28.8%
|
50−55
−28.8%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 110−120
+27.2%
|
90−95
−27.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 118
+68.6%
|
70−75
−68.6%
|
| Valorant | 180−190
+14.7%
|
160−170
−14.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+17%
|
90−95
−17%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+32.6%
|
45−50
−32.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+27.5%
|
50−55
−27.5%
|
| Dota 2 | 130−140
+9.9%
|
120−130
−9.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+21.5%
|
75−80
−21.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+22.3%
|
90−95
−22.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 85−90
+26.9%
|
65−70
−26.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 110−120
+27.2%
|
90−95
−27.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65
−7.7%
|
70−75
+7.7%
|
| Valorant | 180−190
+14.7%
|
160−170
−14.7%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 130−140
+16.2%
|
110−120
−16.2%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+13.6%
|
21−24
−13.6%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 200−210
+21.6%
|
160−170
−21.6%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 55−60
+30.2%
|
40−45
−30.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45
+28.1%
|
30−35
−28.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Valorant | 220−230
+10.8%
|
200−210
−10.8%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+19.7%
|
65−70
−19.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+34.8%
|
21−24
−34.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65−70
+27.8%
|
50−55
−27.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 75−80
+27.9%
|
60−65
−27.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+23.8%
|
40−45
−23.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 50−55
+30.8%
|
35−40
−30.8%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 70−75
+30.4%
|
55−60
−30.4%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 21−24
+21.1%
|
18−20
−21.1%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+27.3%
|
10−12
−27.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 55−60
+31.8%
|
40−45
−31.8%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
+30%
|
20−22
−30%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 46
+31.4%
|
35−40
−31.4%
|
| Valorant | 170−180
+26.8%
|
130−140
−26.8%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+27.8%
|
35−40
−27.8%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+27.3%
|
10−12
−27.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+40%
|
10−11
−40%
|
| Dota 2 | 90−95
+16.7%
|
75−80
−16.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+29.6%
|
27−30
−29.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+23.8%
|
40−45
−23.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+31.8%
|
21−24
−31.8%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+36%
|
24−27
−36%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 30−35
+30.8%
|
24−27
−30.8%
|
This is how Quadro P5200 and Quadro P4200 compete in popular games:
- Quadro P5200 is 26% faster in 1080p
- Quadro P5200 is 37% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro P5200 is 69% faster.
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P4200 is 8% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Quadro P5200 is ahead in 65 tests (97%)
- Quadro P4200 is ahead in 1 test (1%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (1%)
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
