Quadro K4200 vs FirePro W7000
Quadro K4200
Popular choices:
FirePro W7000
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. 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
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W7000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro K4200 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.7% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FirePro W7000.
| Insight | Quadro K4200 | FirePro W7000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro K4200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro K4200 holds the technical lead. Priced at $50 (vs $50), it costs 0% less, resulting in a 0.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro K4200 | FirePro W7000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+0.7%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 Quadro K4200 and FirePro W7000
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.
FirePro W7000
The FirePro W7000 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: 4,304 points. Launch price was $899.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro K4200 scores 4,332 and the FirePro W7000 reaches 4,304 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K4200 is built on Kepler while the FirePro W7000 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,344 (Quadro K4200) vs 1,280 (FirePro W7000). Raw compute: 2.107 TFLOPS (Quadro K4200) vs 2.432 TFLOPS (FirePro W7000).
| Feature | Quadro K4200 | FirePro W7000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,332 | 4,304 |
| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1344+5% | 1280 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.107 TFLOPS | 2.432 TFLOPS+15% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 112+40% | 80 |
| L1 Cache | 112 KB | 320 KB+186% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K4200 | FirePro W7000 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | Quadro K4200 | FirePro W7000 |
|---|---|---|
| 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_0 (Quadro K4200) vs 12 (FirePro W7000). Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 6.
| Feature | Quadro K4200 | FirePro W7000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12_0 | 12 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 6+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 2nd Gen (Quadro K4200) vs VCE 1.0 (FirePro W7000). Decoder: NVDEC 1st Gen vs UVD.
| Feature | Quadro K4200 | FirePro W7000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 2nd Gen | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 1st Gen | UVD |
| Codecs | — | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K4200 draws 108W versus the FirePro W7000's 150W — a 32.6% difference. The Quadro K4200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K4200) vs 350W (FirePro W7000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 241mm vs 242mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | Quadro K4200 | FirePro W7000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 108W-28% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 241mm | 242mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 90°C |
| Perf/Watt | 40.1+40% | 28.7 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro K4200 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the FirePro W7000 launched at $899 and now averages $50. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 86.6 (Quadro K4200) vs 86.1 (FirePro W7000) — the Quadro K4200 offers 0.6% better value. The Quadro K4200 is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2012).
| Feature | Quadro K4200 | FirePro W7000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0-100% | $899 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50 | $50 |
| Performance per Dollar | 86.6 | 86.1 |
| Codename | GK104 | Pitcairn |
| Release | July 22 2014 | June 13 2012 |
| Ranking | #475 | #477 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro K4200 and FirePro W7000
