AMD Radeon RX 580 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4200

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon RX 580 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 RX 580

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 8 month(s) later
• Around 63% higher core clock speed: 1257 MHz vs 771 MHz
• Around 71% higher boost clock speed: 1340 MHz vs 784 MHz
• 2197.5x more texture fill rate: 192.96 GTexel/s vs 87.81 GTexel / s
• Around 71% higher pipelines: 2304 vs 1344
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• 2x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 4 GB
• Around 48% higher memory clock speed: 8000 MHz vs 5400 MHz
• 2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8827 vs 4340
• Around 54% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 767 vs 498
• 3.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 39028 vs 12321
• 3.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 116.142 vs 33.016
• Around 39% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1022.932 vs 736.063
• 3.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 9.235 vs 2.73
• 2.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 84.034 vs 31.588
• 8.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 607.721 vs 70.194
• Around 77% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 11281 vs 6373
• Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3695 vs 3382
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3349 vs 3311
• Around 77% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 11281 vs 6373
• Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3695 vs 3382
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3349 vs 3311

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K4200

• 339.8x better floating-point performance: 2,107 gflops vs 6.2 TFLOPs
• Around 71% lower typical power consumption: 108 Watt vs 185 Watt

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 580
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K4200

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	8827 4340
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	767 498
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	39028 12321
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	116.142 33.016
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1022.932 736.063
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	9.235 2.73
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	84.034 31.588
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	607.721 70.194
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	11281 6373
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3695 3382
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3349 3311
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	11281 6373
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3695 3382
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3349 3311

Compare specifications (specs)