CPU
GPU
Quadro P4200
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
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 Quadro P4200
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro P4200 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.9% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (8 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER.
| Insight | Quadro P4200 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | 🎮 High Capacity (4 GB) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $81 versus $110 for the Quadro P4200, it costs 26% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 33.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro P4200 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+33.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($110) | ✅More affordable ($81) |
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 P4200 and GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
Quadro P4200
The Quadro P4200 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: 10,376 points.
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 22 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1530 MHz to 1725 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,186 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro P4200 scores 10,376 and the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER reaches 10,186 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro P4200 is built on Pascal while the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER uses Turing, both on 16 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,304 (Quadro P4200) vs 1,280 (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Raw compute: 7.589 TFLOPS (Quadro P4200) vs 4.416 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Boost clocks: 1647 MHz vs 1725 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro P4200 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,376+2% | 10,186 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Turing |
| Process Node | 16 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 2304+80% | 1280 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 7.589 TFLOPS+72% | 4.416 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1647 MHz | 1725 MHz+5% |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 144+80% | 80 |
| L1 Cache | 0.84 MB | 1.3 MB+55% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro P4200 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro P4200 comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER has 4 GB. The Quadro P4200 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Quadro P4200) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER) — the Quadro P4200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro P4200 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+100% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (Quadro P4200) vs 12.1 (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.
| Feature | Quadro P4200 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4+33% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6th Gen (Quadro P4200) vs 7th Gen NVENC (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Decoder: NVDEC 3rd Gen vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.265,H.264,VP9 (Quadro P4200) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER).
| Feature | Quadro P4200 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6th Gen | 7th Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | NVDEC 3rd Gen | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | H.265,H.264,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro P4200 draws 100W versus the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER's 100W — a 0% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Quadro P4200) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 105mm vs 229mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 75°C.
| Feature | Quadro P4200 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 350W-30% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 105mm | 229mm |
| Height | 82mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 80 | 75°C-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 103.8+2% | 101.9 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro P4200 launched at $1200 MSRP and currently averages $110, while the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER launched at $159 and now averages $81. The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER costs 26.4% less ($29 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 94.3 (Quadro P4200) vs 125.8 (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER) — the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER offers 33.4% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2018).
| Feature | Quadro P4200 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1200 | $159-87% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $110 | $81-26% |
| Performance per Dollar | 94.3 | 125.8+33% |
| Codename | GP104 | TU116 |
| Release | February 21 2018 | November 22 2019 |
| Ranking | #266 | #258 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro P4200 and GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
