Radeon Pro 5500M vs GeForce4 420 Go
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce4 420 Go with Radeon Pro 5500M, including specs and performance data.
Pro 5500M outperforms GeForce4 420 Go by a whopping 160600% 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 | 1575 | 352 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 14.40 |
| Architecture | Celsius (1999−2005) | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) |
| GPU code name | NV17 A5 | Navi 14 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 6 February 2002 (23 years ago) | 13 November 2019 (5 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 | 2 | 1536 |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 190 MHz | 1450 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 29 million | 6,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 150 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 85 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 0.8 | 139.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 4.454 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 2 | 32 |
| TMUs | 4 | 96 |
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 size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | AGP 4x | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| 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 | DDR | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 MB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 200 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 3.2 GB/s | 192.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 8.0 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 1.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
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 | -0−1 | 57 |
| 1440p | -0−1 | 59 |
| 4K | -0−1 | 32 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 30−35 |
| God of War | 4−5
−725%
|
30−35
+725%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 30−35 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−3250%
|
65−70
+3250%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−725%
|
30−35
+725%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
−917%
|
60−65
+917%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
−465%
|
130−140
+465%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 9−10
−2211%
|
208
+2211%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 30−35 |
| Dota 2 | 7−8
−1486%
|
111
+1486%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−3250%
|
65−70
+3250%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−725%
|
30−35
+725%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
−917%
|
60−65
+917%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−1260%
|
68
+1260%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
−465%
|
130−140
+465%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 30−35 |
| Dota 2 | 7−8
−1429%
|
107
+1429%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−3250%
|
65−70
+3250%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−725%
|
30−35
+725%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
−917%
|
60−65
+917%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−680%
|
39
+680%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
−21.7%
|
28
+21.7%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−1500%
|
30−35
+1500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 0−1 | 107 |
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−3900%
|
40−45
+3900%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−66.7%
|
25
+66.7%
|
| Valorant | 0−1 | 90−95 |
4K
Ultra Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−1500%
|
16−18
+1500%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
−1500%
|
16−18
+1500%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 76
+0%
|
76
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 31
+0%
|
31
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 62
+0%
|
62
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 69
+0%
|
69
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 37
+0%
|
37
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 59
+0%
|
59
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 55
+0%
|
55
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 118
+0%
|
118
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35
+0%
|
35
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 22
+0%
|
22
+0%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 47
+0%
|
47
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40
+0%
|
40
+0%
|
| God of War | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 71
+0%
|
71
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14
+0%
|
14
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 54
+0%
|
54
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 20
+0%
|
20
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| God of War | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 5500M is 3900% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Pro 5500M performs better in 23 tests (38%)
- there's a draw in 37 tests (62%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.01 | 16.07 |
| Recency | 6 February 2002 | 13 November 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 MB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 150 nm | 7 nm |
Pro 5500M has a 160600% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, a 25500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 2042.9% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon Pro 5500M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce4 420 Go in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce4 420 Go is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro 5500M is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
