Radeon R4 Graphics vs GeForce 8800 Ultra

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking941not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency0.68no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameG80Beema
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date2 May 2007 (17 years ago)11 June 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$829 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores612128
Core clock speed612 MHz800 MHz
Number of transistors681 million930 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)171 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate39.176.400
Floating-point processing power0.3871 TFLOPS0.2048 TFLOPS
ROPs244
TMUs328

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16IGP
Length270 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount512 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width384 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1080 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth103.7 GB/sno data

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model4.06.3
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 2 May 2007 11 June 2014
Chip lithography 90 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 171 Watt 15 Watt

R4 Graphics has an age advantage of 7 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 1040% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 8800 Ultra and Radeon R4 Graphics. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra
GeForce 8800 Ultra
AMD Radeon R4 Graphics
Radeon R4 Graphics

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 29 votes

Rate GeForce 8800 Ultra on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 1200 votes

Rate Radeon R4 Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.