
FirePro W7000 Adapter vs Quadro K4200

FirePro W7000 Adapter
Popular choices:

Quadro K4200
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The FirePro W7000 Adapter is positioned at rank #219 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W7000 Adapter
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro W7000 Adapter is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro K4200.
| Insight | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro W7000 Adapter offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro W7000 Adapter holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $50), it costs 70% less, resulting in a 237.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+237.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($15) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($50) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro W7000 Adapter and Quadro K4200

FirePro W7000 Adapter
The FirePro W7000 Adapter is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 13 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 950 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,383 points. Launch price was $899.

Quadro K4200
The Quadro K4200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 22 2014. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 771 MHz to 784 MHz. It has 1344 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 108W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,332 points. Launch price was $854.99.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro W7000 Adapter scores 4,383 and the Quadro K4200 reaches 4,332 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro W7000 Adapter is built on GCN 1.0 while the Quadro K4200 uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,280 (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 1,344 (Quadro K4200). Raw compute: 2.432 TFLOPS (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 2.107 TFLOPS (Quadro K4200).
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,383+1% | 4,332 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1280 | 1344+5% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.432 TFLOPS+15% | 2.107 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 112+40% |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB+186% | 112 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 12_0 (Quadro K4200). Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 3.
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12_0 |
| Max Displays | 6+100% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 1.0 (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs NVENC 2nd Gen (Quadro K4200). Decoder: UVD vs NVDEC 1st Gen.
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 1.0 | NVENC 2nd Gen |
| Decoder | UVD | NVDEC 1st Gen |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | — |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro W7000 Adapter draws 150W versus the Quadro K4200's 108W — a 32.6% difference. The Quadro K4200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 350W (Quadro K4200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 242mm vs 241mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 108W-28% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 242mm | 241mm |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 90°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 29.2 | 40.1+37% |
Value Analysis
The FirePro W7000 Adapter launched at $899 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the Quadro K4200 launched at $0 and now averages $50. The FirePro W7000 Adapter costs 70% less ($35 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 292.2 (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 86.6 (Quadro K4200) — the FirePro W7000 Adapter offers 237.4% better value. The Quadro K4200 is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2012).
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $899 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15-70% | $50 |
| Performance per Dollar | 292.2+237% | 86.6 |
| Codename | Pitcairn | GK104 |
| Release | June 13 2012 | July 22 2014 |
| Ranking | #477 | #475 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















