NVIDIA Quadro K4200 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K4200 and Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 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 1 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- 3.9x more core clock speed: 771 MHz vs 200 MHz
- 8.4x more texture fill rate: 87.81 GTexel / s vs 10.4 GTexel / s
- 33.6x more pipelines: 1344 vs 40
- 20.3x better floating-point performance: 2,107 gflops vs 104.0 gflops
- 3.6x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4327 vs 1191
- Around 28% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 509 vs 399
- 2.4x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 12186 vs 5077
- 3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6373 vs 2095
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3382 vs 3285
- 3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6373 vs 2095
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3382 vs 3285
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 22 July 2014 vs 27 May 2013 |
| Core clock speed | 771 MHz vs 200 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 87.81 GTexel / s vs 10.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1344 vs 40 |
| Floating-point performance | 2,107 gflops vs 104.0 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4327 vs 1191 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 509 vs 399 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 12186 vs 5077 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6373 vs 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3382 vs 3285 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6373 vs 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3382 vs 3285 |
Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
- Around 66% higher boost clock speed: 1300 MHz vs 784 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 28 nm
- 3.6x lower typical power consumption: 30 Watt vs 108 Watt
| Boost clock speed | 1300 MHz vs 784 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt vs 108 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K4200
GPU 2: Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro K4200 | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4327 | 1191 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 509 | 399 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 12186 | 5077 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 33.016 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 736.063 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.73 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 31.588 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 70.194 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6373 | 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3382 | 3285 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3311 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6373 | 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3382 | 3285 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3311 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro K4200 | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | Generation 7.5 |
| Code name | GK104 | Haswell GT3e |
| Launch date | 22 July 2014 | 27 May 2013 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $854.99 | |
| Place in performance rating | 684 | 643 |
| Price now | $446.99 | |
| Type | Workstation | Laptop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 11.92 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 784 MHz | 1300 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 771 MHz | 200 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 2,107 gflops | 104.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 22 nm |
| Pipelines | 1344 | 40 |
| Texture fill rate | 87.81 GTexel / s | 10.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 108 Watt | 30 Watt |
| Transistor count | 3,540 million | 392 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Length | 241 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.3 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 172.8 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 5400 MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | eDRAM |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro K4200 with others
NVIDIAQuadro K4200 vs
IntelHD Graphics 2000
NVIDIAQuadro K4200 vs
AMDFirePro S9000
NVIDIAQuadro K4200 vs
IntelHD Graphics P4600
NVIDIAQuadro K4200 vs
AMDRadeon Pro 455
NVIDIAQuadro K4200 vs
AMDRadeon RX 580 (Laptop)
NVIDIAQuadro K4200 vs
AMDRadeon Instinct MI25 MxGPU
