Radeon Sky 500 vs GeForce GT 425M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 425M with Radeon Sky 500, including specs and performance data.

GT 425M
2010
1 GB DDR3, 23 Watt
1.35

Sky 500 outperforms GT 425M by a whopping 804% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1022401
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.315.97
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGF108Pitcairn
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date3 September 2010 (14 years ago)27 March 2013 (11 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 cores961280
CUDA cores96no data
Core clock speed560 MHz950 MHz
Number of transistors585 million2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate8.96076.00
Floating-point processing power0.215 TFLOPS2.432 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs1680

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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data242 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin

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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1200 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s154 GB/s
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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DisplayPort
DisplayPort countno data1
Dual-link DVI support-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
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. 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.

GT 425M 1.35
Sky 500 12.21
+804%

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.

GT 425M 522
Sky 500 4709
+802%

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:

900p11
−764%
95−100
+764%
Full HD17
−782%
150−160
+782%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−800%
27−30
+800%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−800%
27−30
+800%
Hitman 3 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−757%
120−130
+757%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−775%
70−75
+775%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−779%
290−300
+779%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−800%
27−30
+800%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−800%
27−30
+800%
Hitman 3 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−757%
120−130
+757%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−775%
70−75
+775%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−764%
95−100
+764%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−779%
290−300
+779%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−800%
27−30
+800%
Hitman 3 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−757%
120−130
+757%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−775%
70−75
+775%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−764%
95−100
+764%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−779%
290−300
+779%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Hitman 3 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−800%
45−50
+800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−800%
27−30
+800%

This is how GT 425M and Sky 500 compete in popular games:

  • Sky 500 is 764% faster in 900p
  • Sky 500 is 782% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.35 12.21
Recency 3 September 2010 27 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 150 Watt

GT 425M has 552.2% lower power consumption.

Sky 500, on the other hand, has a 804.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Sky 500 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 425M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 425M is a notebook card while Radeon Sky 500 is a desktop one.


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 GT 425M
GeForce GT 425M
AMD Radeon Sky 500
Radeon Sky 500

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.


3.3 55 votes

Rate GeForce GT 425M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 15 votes

Rate Radeon Sky 500 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.