ATI Radeon Xpress 200M vs GeForce 410M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 410M and Radeon Xpress 200M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
410M outperforms ATI Xpress 200M by a whopping 1080% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1195 | 1492 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.90 | no data |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | R300 (2005−2008) |
| GPU code name | GF119 | RC410 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 5 January 2011 (14 years ago) | 2005 (20 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 48 | 6 |
| Core clock speed | 575 MHz | 336 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 350 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 292 million | 107 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 4.600 | 0.67 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1104 TFLOPS | no data |
| Gigaflops | 73 | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 2 |
| TMUs | 8 | 2 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | DDR3 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | Up to 512 MB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 12.8 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | DisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI | Portable Device Dependent |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | 8.0 | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 9.0 (9_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | + | 2.0 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | - |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 8 | 0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+20.8%
|
24−27
−20.8%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 18−20
+111%
|
9−10
−111%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+50%
|
8−9
−50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+20.8%
|
24−27
−20.8%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+50%
|
8−9
−50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+20.8%
|
24−27
−20.8%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce 410M is 500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- GeForce 410M is ahead in 16 tests (80%)
- there's a draw in 4 tests (20%)
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
