Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
RTX 4090 vs 825M
Price now
160$
Games supported
57%
- Interface PCIe 3.0 x8
- Core clock speed 850
- Max video memory 2048 MB
- Memory type DDR3
- Memory clock speed 1800
- Maximum resolution
- Interface PCIe 4.0 x16
- Core clock speed 2235
- Max video memory 24 GB
- Memory type GDDR6X
- Memory clock speed 21000
- Maximum resolution
Price now
2318$
Games supported
100%
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance rating | 781 | 1 |
| Place by popularity | no data | 2 |
| Value for money | 0.25 | 12.07 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | Ada Lovelace |
| GPU code name | GK208 | AD102-300-A1 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 27 January 2014 (9 years old) | 20 September 2022 (less than a year old) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $1,599 |
| Current price | $160 | $2318 (1.4x MSRP) |
Value for money
Technical specs
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 384 | 16384 |
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz | 2235 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 941 MHz | 2520 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 915 million | 76,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 4 nm |
| Thermal design power (TDP) | 33 Watt | 450 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 30.11 | 1,290 |
| Floating-point performance | 722.7 gflops | no data |
Dimensions and compatibility
Information on GeForce 825M and GeForce RTX 4090 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 304 mm |
| Width | no data | 3-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 16-pin |
Memory
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated VRAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR6X |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 24 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 21000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | 1,008 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Video outputs and ports
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 | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |
| HDMI | no data | + |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | + | no data |
API support
APIs supported, including particular versions of those APIs.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | 1.3 |
| CUDA | + | 8.9 |
Benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. Note that overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range.
Overall score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
- Passmark
- 3DMark Vantage Performance
- 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
- 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
- 3DMark Fire Strike Score
- 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Passmark
This is probably the most ubiquitous benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various 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.
Benchmark coverage: 24%
GeForce RTX 4090 outperforms GeForce 825M by 4949% in Passmark.
3DMark Vantage Performance
3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.
Benchmark coverage: 16%
GeForce RTX 4090 outperforms GeForce 825M by 2093% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.
3DMark 11 Performance GPU
3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.
Benchmark coverage: 16%
GeForce RTX 4090 outperforms GeForce 825M by 5871% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.
3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.
Benchmark coverage: 13%
GeForce RTX 4090 outperforms GeForce 825M by 3250% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.
3DMark Fire Strike Score
Benchmark coverage: 13%
GeForce RTX 4090 outperforms GeForce 825M by 4415% in 3DMark Fire Strike Score.
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature seemingly made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic enough graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
Benchmark coverage: 13%
GeForce RTX 4090 outperforms GeForce 825M by 6615% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 35
−689%
| 276
+689%
|
| 1440p | no data | 220 |
| 4K | no data | 163 |
Popular games
- Full HD
Low Preset - Full HD
Medium Preset - Full HD
High Preset - Full HD
Ultra Preset - 1440p
High Preset - 1440p
Ultra Preset - 4K
High Preset - 4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−4400%
|
225
+4400%
|
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 3−4
−4300%
|
130−140
+4300%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
−6467%
|
190−200
+6467%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−12
−1518%
|
170−180
+1518%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−4340%
|
222
+4340%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−10350%
|
209
+10350%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 2−3
−8700%
|
176
+8700%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−6700%
|
270−280
+6700%
|
| Hitman 3 | 2−3
−10850%
|
210−220
+10850%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
−3680%
|
180−190
+3680%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9
−3500%
|
288
+3500%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 1−2
−18200%
|
183
+18200%
|
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 3−4
−4300%
|
130−140
+4300%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
−6467%
|
190−200
+6467%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−12
−1518%
|
170−180
+1518%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−4180%
|
214
+4180%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−9950%
|
201
+9950%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 2−3
−8400%
|
170
+8400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−6700%
|
270−280
+6700%
|
| Hitman 3 | 2−3
−10850%
|
210−220
+10850%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−5125%
|
209
+5125%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
−3680%
|
180−190
+3680%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9
−3450%
|
284
+3450%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−11600%
|
585
+11600%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 1−2
−16500%
|
166
+16500%
|
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 3−4
−4300%
|
130−140
+4300%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
−6467%
|
190−200
+6467%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−4100%
|
210
+4100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−9250%
|
187
+9250%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 2−3
−7550%
|
153
+7550%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−6700%
|
270−280
+6700%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−6020%
|
306
+6020%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 1−2
−15400%
|
155
+15400%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 5−6
−2880%
|
140−150
+2880%
|
| Hitman 3 | 4−5
−5225%
|
210−220
+5225%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 5−6
−3280%
|
160−170
+3280%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−4200%
|
172
+4200%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2
−9200%
|
90−95
+9200%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 5−6
−5280%
|
269
+5280%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−4933%
|
151
+4933%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−4525%
|
185
+4525%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
−15100%
|
152
+15100%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 0−1 | 149 |
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−4700%
|
95−100
+4700%
|
| Hitman 3 | 2−3
−6300%
|
120−130
+6300%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 4−5
−2725%
|
110−120
+2725%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2
−6300%
|
60−65
+6300%
|
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | 65−70 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−7800%
|
79
+7800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−4225%
|
173
+4225%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 6−7
−2317%
|
145
+2317%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−16100%
|
160−170
+16100%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 0−1 | 114 |
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance rating | 1.98 | 100.00 |
| Recency | 27 January 2014 | 20 September 2022 |
| Memory bus width | 64 | 384 |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 | 1 |
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 384 | 16384 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 4 nm |
| Thermal design power (TDP) | 33 Watt | 450 Watt |
Judging by the results of synthetic and gaming tests, Technical City recommends
since it shows better performance.
Be aware that GeForce 825M is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 4090 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Competitors of GeForce 825M by AMD
The nearest GeForce 825M's AMD equivalent is Radeon 520, which is faster by 1% and higher by 4 positions in our performance rating.
Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce 825M:
Competitors of GeForce RTX 4090 by AMD
According to our data, the closest equivalent to GeForce RTX 4090 by AMD is Radeon RX 7900 XTX, which is slower by 19% and lower by 3 positions in our rating.
Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce RTX 4090:
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
