CPU
GPU
Tesla K20Xm
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 Tesla K20Xm is positioned at rank #100 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Balanced 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 Tesla K20Xm
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Tesla K20Xm is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.6% higher G3D Mark score and 50% more VRAM (6 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro K4200.
| Insight | Tesla K20Xm | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.6%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+50%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 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 $7,699), it costs 99% less, resulting in a 15049.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Tesla K20Xm | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+15049.7%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($7,699) | ✅More affordable ($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.
Path of Exile 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Tesla K20Xm and Quadro K4200
Tesla K20Xm
The Tesla K20Xm is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 12 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 732 MHz. It has 2688 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 235W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,403 points. Launch price was $7,699.
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 Tesla K20Xm scores 4,403 and the Quadro K4200 reaches 4,332 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Tesla K20Xm is built on Kepler while the Quadro K4200 uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,688 (Tesla K20Xm) vs 1,344 (Quadro K4200). Raw compute: 3.935 TFLOPS (Tesla K20Xm) vs 2.107 TFLOPS (Quadro K4200).
| Feature | Tesla K20Xm | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,403+2% | 4,332 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2688+100% | 1344 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.935 TFLOPS+87% | 2.107 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 48+50% | 32 |
| TMUs | 224+100% | 112 |
| L1 Cache | 224 KB+100% | 112 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB+200% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Tesla K20Xm | 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)
The Tesla K20Xm comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro K4200 has 4 GB. The Tesla K20Xm offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (Tesla K20Xm) vs 0.5 MB (Quadro K4200) — the Tesla K20Xm has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Tesla K20Xm | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+50% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB+200% | 0.5 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The Tesla K20Xm draws 235W versus the Quadro K4200's 108W — a 74.1% difference. The Quadro K4200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Tesla K20Xm) vs 350W (Quadro K4200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Tesla K20Xm | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 235W | 108W-54% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 241mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Perf/Watt | 18.7 | 40.1+114% |
Value Analysis
The Tesla K20Xm launched at $7699 MSRP, while the Quadro K4200 launched at $0 and now averages $50. The Quadro K4200 is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2012).
| Feature | Tesla K20Xm | Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $7699 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $50 |
| Codename | GK110 | GK104 |
| Release | November 12 2012 | July 22 2014 |
| Ranking | #473 | #475 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Tesla K20Xm and Quadro K4200
