NVIDIA Quadro K4200 vs Intel Data Center GPU Flex 170
We compared two Professional market GPUs: 4GB VRAM Quadro K4200 and 16GB VRAM Data Center GPU Flex 170 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
NVIDIA Quadro K4200 's Advantages
Lower TDP (108W vs 150W)
Intel Data Center GPU Flex 170 's Advantages
Released 8 years and 1 months late
Boost Clock has increased by 161% (2050MHz vs 784MHz)
More VRAM (16GB vs 4GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (512.0GB/s vs 172.8GB/s)
2752 additional rendering cores
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
Quadro K4200
2.107 TFLOPS
Data Center GPU Flex 170
+696%
16.79 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Jul 2014
Release Date
Aug 2022
Quadro
Generation
Data Center GPU
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 2.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 4.0 x16
Clock Speeds
771 MHz
Base Clock
1950 MHz
784 MHz
Boost Clock
2050 MHz
1350 MHz
Memory Clock
2000 MHz
Memory
4GB
Memory Size
16GB
GDDR5
Memory Type
GDDR6
256bit
Memory Bus
256bit
172.8GB/s
Bandwidth
512.0GB/s
Render Config
-
-
-
-
-
-
1344
Shading Units
4096
112
TMUs
256
32
ROPs
128
-
-
-
-
RT Cores
32
16 KB (per SMX)
L1 Cache
-
512 KB
L2 Cache
16 MB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
21.95 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
262.4 GPixel/s
87.81 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
524.8 GTexel/s
-
FP16 (half)
33.59 TFLOPS
2.107 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
16.79 TFLOPS
87.81 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
-
Board Design
108W
TDP
150W
300 W
Suggested PSU
450 W
1x DVI
2x DisplayPort 1.2
Outputs
1x HDMI 2.1
3x DisplayPort 2.0
1x 6-pin
Power Connectors
1x 8-pin
Graphics Processor
GK104
GPU Name
DG2-512
GK104-850-A2
GPU Variant
ACM-G10
Kepler
Architecture
Generation 12.7
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
28 nm
Process Size
6 nm
3.54 billion
Transistors
21.7 billion
294 mm²
Die Size
406 mm²
Graphics Features
12 (11_0)
DirectX
12 Ultimate (12_2)
4.6
OpenGL
4.6
3.0
OpenCL
3.0
1.1
Vulkan
1.3
3.0
CUDA
-
5.1
Shader Model
6.6
