NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4200 Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4200

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 and NVIDIA Quadro K4200 represent two distinct eras of GPU design, with the GTX 480 built on the Fermi architecture at 40 nm and the K4200 on Kepler at 28 nm. In the sole head-to-head benchmark available, the GeForce GTX 480 scores 13,300 in Geekbench OpenCL, edging out the Quadro K4200's 12,313 by 8%. However, the Quadro K4200 counters with a Vulkan score of 12,482, a capability the GTX 480 lacks entirely. The GTX 480 holds a 53rd percentile ranking among all GPUs versus the K4200's 52nd, placing both near the middle of the performance distribution. The data reveals a nuanced picture: the GTX 480 wins raw compute throughput, while the K4200 offers modern API support and dramatically lower power demands.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: the GeForce GTX 480 is the compute-oriented choice, while the Quadro K4200 suits workloads requiring modern API compatibility and efficiency. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 480's 13,300 score outpaces the K4200's 12,313 by 8%, making it the faster card for general-purpose compute tasks that leverage OpenCL. This aligns with the GTX 480's higher FP32 throughput of 1,345.0 GFLOPS versus the K4200's 2.107 TFLOPS—note that while the K4200 has a higher raw FP32 number, the benchmark result favors the GTX 480, suggesting real-world performance depends on more than peak specs.

The Quadro K4200, however, is the only card of the pair with a Vulkan score—12,482—and it also supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, identical to the GTX 480's API list. The K4200's advantage in API breadth makes it the safer choice for software stacks that rely on Vulkan. Additionally, the K4200's 108 W TDP versus the GTX 480's 250 W, combined with a single-slot design and one 6-pin connector, positions it as the low-power, space-efficient option. The GTX 480 requires dual-slot cooling, a 6-pin plus an 8-pin connector, and a 600 W suggested PSU, whereas the K4200 asks for only 300 W.

Users targeting maximum OpenCL compute from this pair should select the GTX 480, as its 8% lead is consistent and its 1,536 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus delivers 177.4 GB/s bandwidth. Those prioritizing driver longevity, Vulkan support, or system integration will find the K4200's 4 GB frame buffer and 172.8 GB/s bandwidth—with a narrower 256-bit bus—sufficient, while its 28 nm process node and 12.0M transistors per mm² density signal a more modern design. The GTX 480's 3,100 million transistors on 529 mm² yields a transistor density of 5.9M per mm², a stark contrast that explains its higher power draw.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The GeForce GTX 480 scores 13,300 in Geekbench OpenCL, outperforming the Quadro K4200's 12,313 by an 8% margin. This is the only head-to-head benchmark where both cards have data.

Q: Does the Quadro K4200 support any API that the GTX 480 does not?

A: Yes, the K4200 supports Vulkan 1.2.175 and has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 12,482. The GTX 480 has no Vulkan support listed, though both cards share DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The GTX 480 has a 250 W TDP with a 600 W suggested PSU, while the K4200 draws only 108 W with a 300 W suggested PSU. The GTX 480 needs dual-slot cooling and 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin connectors; the K4200 uses single-slot cooling and a single 6-pin connector.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The K4200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, versus the GTX 480's 1,536 MB. However, the GTX 480's 384-bit bus provides 177.4 GB/s bandwidth, slightly higher than the K4200's 172.8 GB/s over a 256-bit bus.

Q: How do their transistor counts and die sizes differ?

A: The GTX 480 packs 3,100 million transistors on a 529 mm² die (5.9M per mm²), while the K4200 has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die (12.0M per mm²). The K4200's 28 nm process allows nearly double the transistor density.

Q: What are their production statuses and release dates?

A: Both are end-of-life products. The GTX 480 launched on March 25, 2010, and the K4200 on July 21, 2014, making the latter a later-generation design within the same manufacturer's lineup.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 480 uses the GF100 chip built on Fermi architecture at TSMC's 40 nm process. Its 3,100 million transistors occupy a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.9M per mm². The K4200 employs the GK104 chip on Kepler architecture, also fabricated by TSMC but at 28 nm, housing 3,540 million transistors in just 294 mm²—a density of 12.0M per mm². This architectural leap explains the K4200's superior efficiency.

The GTX 480 features 480 shading units, 60 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The K4200 dramatically increases the shading unit count to 1,344, with 112 TMUs but only 32 ROPs. Pixel rates are close—21.03 GPixel/s for the GTX 480 versus 21.95 GPixel/s for the K4200—but texture rates diverge sharply: the GTX 480 achieves 42.06 GTexel/s, while the K4200 reaches 87.81 GTexel/s, more than double. FP32 compute shows the K4200 at 2.107 TFLOPS, higher than the GTX 480's 1,345.0 GFLOPS, yet the OpenCL benchmark favors the GTX 480, indicating architecture-specific efficiencies.

Memory subsystems reflect different design priorities. The GTX 480 uses 1,536 MB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus at 924 MHz (3.7 Gbps effective), achieving 177.4 GB/s. The K4200 pairs 4 GB of GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus at 1,350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective), reaching 172.8 GB/s. The GTX 480's wider bus compensates for lower clock speed, while the K4200's higher memory clock and larger capacity target professional workloads needing more VRAM.

API support distinguishes the pair significantly. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but only the K4200 lists Vulkan 1.2.175 support. The GTX 480 has no Vulkan entry, reflecting its older Fermi generation. This gap matters for modern applications using Vulkan for cross-platform rendering.

Physical and power characteristics also stem from architecture. The GTX 480 is dual-slot, 267 mm long, with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin connectors, and a 250 W TDP. The K4200 is single-slot, 241 mm long, with a 6-pin connector, and a 108 W TDP. The suggested PSU differs accordingly: 600 W for the GTX 480 versus 300 W for the K4200. Display outputs vary: the GTX 480 offers 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a, while the K4200 provides 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2.

Specification Differences

| Specification | GeForce GTX 480 | Quadro K4200 |

|----------------|-----------------|--------------|

| Chip | GF100 | GK104 |

| Architecture | Fermi | Kepler |

| Generation | GeForce 400 | Quadro Kepler (Kx200) |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 3,100 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 529 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 5.9M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | N/A | 771 MHz |

| Boost Clock | N/A | 784 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 924 MHz (3.7 Gbps) | 1,350 MHz (5.4 Gbps) |

| Memory Size | 1,536 MB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 177.4 GB/s | 172.8 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 480 | 1,344 |

| TMUs | 60 | 112 |

| ROPs | 48 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 21.03 GPixel/s | 21.95 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 42.06 GTexel/s | 87.81 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,345.0 GFLOPS | 2.107 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 250 W | 108 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 300 W |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| Vulkan Support | None | 1.2.175 |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 241 mm (9.5 inches) |

| Height | N/A | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Release Date | 2010-03-25 | 2014-07-21 |

| Launch MSRP | 499 USD | N/A |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, where the GeForce GTX 480 scores 13,300 against the Quadro K4200's 12,313, giving the GTX 480 an 8% victory. This is the only direct comparison in the data, and it favors the older Fermi card despite the K4200's newer architecture and higher shading unit count.

The GTX 480's nearest rivals—AMD Radeon Pro 555X at 13,321, AMD FirePro M6100 at 13,354, AMD Radeon RX 5500M at 13,356, and AMD Radeon HD 8950M at 13,376—all score within 0.6% of the GTX 480, showing it sits at a performance plateau. The K4200's rivals include NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm at 12,625 (-1.8%), AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT at 12,710 (-2.5%), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 at 12,773 (-2.9%), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A at 11,998 (+3.3%). The K4200's 12,398 average benchmark score (combining OpenCL and Vulkan results) falls below the GTX 480's 13,300, reinforcing the GTX 480's compute advantage.

Beyond the head-to-head, the K4200's Vulkan score of 12,482 provides a data point the GTX 480 cannot match, since the GTX 480 has no Vulkan benchmark listed. This makes the K4200 the only choice for Vulkan-based workloads within this comparison, despite its lower OpenCL showing.

The GTX 480's wins are concentrated in OpenCL compute, where its 8% delta over the K4200 represents a meaningful gap. The K4200's wins are structural: single-slot form factor, 4 GB memory capacity, Vulkan support, and a 108 W TDP that is less than half the GTX 480's 250 W. While the K4200's FP32 peak of 2.107 TFLOPS exceeds the GTX 480's 1,345.0 GFLOPS, benchmark results show the GTX 480 translating its architecture more efficiently into OpenCL performance.

For texture-heavy operations, the K4200's 87.81 GTexel/s rate dwarfs the GTX 480's 42.06 GTexel/s, yet pixel rates are nearly identical at 21.95 versus 21.03 GPixel/s. This suggests the K4200 excels in fill-rate-bound scenarios, while the GTX 480's wider memory bus provides a slight bandwidth edge at 177.4 GB/s versus 172.8 GB/s. The data does not include a Vulkan score for the GTX 480, so any comparison there is impossible—the K4200 is the sole Vulkan-capable card in this matchup.