Quadro NVS 420 vs GeForce G200
Quadro NVS 420
Popular choices:
GeForce G200
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 GeForce G200
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Quadro NVS 420 uses modern memory architecture. The Quadro NVS 420 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce G200 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro NVS 420 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.7% higher G3D Mark score and 700% more VRAM (4 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce G200.
| Insight | Quadro NVS 420 | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+700%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce G200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $15 versus $20 for the Quadro NVS 420, it costs 25% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 32.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro NVS 420 | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+32.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($20) | ✅More affordable ($15) |
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 NVS 420 and GeForce G200
Quadro NVS 420
The Quadro NVS 420 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 21 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1227 MHz to 1647 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 137 points.
GeForce G200
The GeForce G200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1228 MHz to 1468 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 136 points. Launch price was $79.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro NVS 420 scores 137 and the GeForce G200 reaches 136 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro NVS 420 is built on Pascal while the GeForce G200 uses Pascal, both on 16 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 2,304 (Quadro NVS 420) vs 384 (GeForce G200). Raw compute: 7.589 TFLOPS (Quadro NVS 420) vs 1.127 TFLOPS (GeForce G200). Boost clocks: 1647 MHz vs 1468 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro NVS 420 | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 137 | 136 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Pascal |
| Process Node | 16 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 2304+500% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 7.589 TFLOPS+573% | 1.127 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1647 MHz+12% | 1468 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+300% | 16 |
| TMUs | 144+500% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 864 KB+500% | 144 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro NVS 420 | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The Quadro NVS 420 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce G200 has 512 MB. The Quadro NVS 420 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Quadro NVS 420) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce G200) — the Quadro NVS 420 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro NVS 420 | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+700% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10_0 (Quadro NVS 420) vs 10.1 (GeForce G200). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 2.
| Feature | Quadro NVS 420 | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10_0 | 10.1 |
| Max Displays | 4+100% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: PureVideo HD (Quadro NVS 420) vs None (GeForce G200). Decoder: PureVideo HD vs PureVideo HD (VP4).
| Feature | Quadro NVS 420 | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | PureVideo HD | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD | PureVideo HD (VP4) |
| Codecs | — | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro NVS 420 draws 100W versus the GeForce G200's 30W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce G200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro NVS 420) vs 350W (GeForce G200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Card length: 160mm vs 168mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | Quadro NVS 420 | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 30W-70% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | 160mm | 168mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 1.4 | 4.5+221% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro NVS 420 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the GeForce G200 launched at $299 and now averages $15. The GeForce G200 costs 25% less ($5 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 6.8 (Quadro NVS 420) vs 9.1 (GeForce G200) — the GeForce G200 offers 33.8% better value. The Quadro NVS 420 is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2017).
| Feature | Quadro NVS 420 | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0-100% | $299 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20 | $15-25% |
| Performance per Dollar | 6.8 | 9.1+34% |
| Codename | GP104 | GP108 |
| Release | February 21 2018 | May 17 2017 |
| Ranking | #266 | #641 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro NVS 420 and GeForce G200
