CPU
GPU
Quadro RTX 3000
Popular choices:
Quadro P4200
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 RTX 3000
Performance Per Dollar Quadro P4200
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro RTX 3000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 4.6% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro P4200 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro RTX 3000 | Quadro P4200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+4.6%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-4.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Turing (2018−2022)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | ✨ DLSS 2 Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+33.3%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro P4200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $110 versus $891 for the Quadro RTX 3000, it costs 88% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 674% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro RTX 3000 | Quadro P4200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+674%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($891) | ✅More affordable ($110) |
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.
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro RTX 3000 and Quadro P4200
Quadro RTX 3000
The Quadro RTX 3000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 13 2018. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1395 MHz to 1770 MHz. It has 4608 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 260W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 72 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,858 points. Launch price was $9,999.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro RTX 3000 scores 10,858 and the Quadro P4200 reaches 10,376 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro RTX 3000 is built on Turing while the Quadro P4200 uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 4,608 (Quadro RTX 3000) vs 2,304 (Quadro P4200). Raw compute: 16.31 TFLOPS (Quadro RTX 3000) vs 7.589 TFLOPS (Quadro P4200). Boost clocks: 1770 MHz vs 1647 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Quadro P4200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,858+5% | 10,376 |
| Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 4608+100% | 2304 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 16.31 TFLOPS+115% | 7.589 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1770 MHz+7% | 1647 MHz |
| ROPs | 96+50% | 64 |
| TMUs | 288+100% | 144 |
| L1 Cache | 4.5 MB+436% | 0.84 MB |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB+200% | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The Quadro RTX 3000 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Quadro P4200 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Quadro P4200 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 2.0 | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 / AFMF (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro RTX 3000 comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro P4200 has 8 GB. The Quadro P4200 offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 6 MB (Quadro RTX 3000) vs 2 MB (Quadro P4200) — the Quadro RTX 3000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Quadro P4200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB | 8 GB+33% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB+200% | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.1 (Quadro RTX 3000) vs 12 (Quadro P4200). Vulkan: 1.0 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Quadro P4200 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.0 | 1.3+30% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (Quadro RTX 3000) vs NVENC 6th Gen (Quadro P4200). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs NVDEC 3rd Gen. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro RTX 3000) vs H.265,H.264,VP9 (Quadro P4200).
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Quadro P4200 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 7th Gen NVENC | NVENC 6th Gen |
| Decoder | 5th Gen NVDEC | NVDEC 3rd Gen |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 | H.265,H.264,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro RTX 3000 draws 260W versus the Quadro P4200's 100W — a 88.9% difference. The Quadro P4200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Quadro RTX 3000) vs 500W (Quadro P4200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 105mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 80.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Quadro P4200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 260W | 100W-62% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 105mm |
| Height | 0mm | 82mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 80-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 41.8 | 103.8+148% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro RTX 3000 launched at $800 MSRP and currently averages $891, while the Quadro P4200 launched at $1200 and now averages $110. The Quadro P4200 costs 87.7% less ($781 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 12.2 (Quadro RTX 3000) vs 94.3 (Quadro P4200) — the Quadro P4200 offers 673% better value.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Quadro P4200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $800-33% | $1200 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $891 | $110-88% |
| Performance per Dollar | 12.2 | 94.3+673% |
| Codename | TU102 | GP104 |
| Release | August 13 2018 | February 21 2018 |
| Ranking | #78 | #266 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro RTX 3000 and Quadro P4200
