NVIDIA Quadro K4200 vs AMD Radeon HD 6970

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K4200 and AMD Radeon HD 6970 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 NVIDIA Quadro K4200

• Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 7 month(s) later
• Around 4% higher texture fill rate: 87.81 GTexel / s vs 84.5 GTexel / s
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 5.1x lower typical power consumption: 108 Watt vs 550 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• 3.9x more memory clock speed: 5400 MHz vs 1375 MHz
• Around 53% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4332 vs 2834
• Around 17% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 502 vs 429
• Around 77% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 33.016 vs 18.676
• Around 49% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.73 vs 1.835
• Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6373 vs 5372
• Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6373 vs 5372

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 6970

• Around 12% higher boost clock speed: 880 MHz vs 784 MHz
• Around 14% higher pipelines: 1536 vs 1344
• Around 28% better floating-point performance: 2,703.4 gflops vs 2,107 gflops
• 2.9x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 35739 vs 12186
• Around 25% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 920.398 vs 736.063
• Around 65% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 52.219 vs 31.588
• 3.9x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 273.175 vs 70.194
• Around 10% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3716 vs 3382
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3311
• Around 10% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3716 vs 3382
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3311

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K4200
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6970

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	4332 2834
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	502 429
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	12186 35739
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	33.016 18.676
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	736.063 920.398
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.73 1.835
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	31.588 52.219
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	70.194 273.175
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6373 5372
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3382 3716
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3311 3358
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6373 5372
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3382 3716
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3311 3358

Compare specifications (specs)