AMD Radeon Pro 455 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4200

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro 455 and NVIDIA Quadro K4200 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro 455

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 3 month(s) later
• Around 11% higher core clock speed: 855 MHz vs 771 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• 3.1x lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 108 Watt
• Around 40% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 705 vs 502
• Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 33.484 vs 33.016
• Around 5% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.854 vs 2.73
• Around 42% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 44.793 vs 31.588
• 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 148.673 vs 70.194
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3359 vs 3311
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3359 vs 3311

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K4200

• 2.1x more texture fill rate: 87.81 GTexel / s vs 41.04 GTexel / s
• Around 75% higher pipelines: 1344 vs 768
• Around 60% better floating-point performance: 2,107 gflops vs 1,313 gflops
• 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• Around 6% higher memory clock speed: 5400 MHz vs 5080 MHz
• Around 39% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4332 vs 3113
• Around 6% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 12186 vs 11544
• Around 28% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 736.063 vs 573.646
• Around 54% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6373 vs 4146
• Around 92% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3382 vs 1762
• Around 54% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6373 vs 4146
• Around 92% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3382 vs 1762

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro 455
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K4200

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	3113 4332
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	705 502
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	11544 12186
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	33.484 33.016
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	573.646 736.063
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.854 2.73
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	44.793 31.588
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	148.673 70.194
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4146 6373
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1762 3382
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3359 3311
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4146 6373
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1762 3382
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3359 3311

Compare specifications (specs)