ATI Radeon Xpress 1250 vs GeForce4 4200 Go

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Architectureno dataR400 (2004−2008)
GPU code nameNV28MRS690
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date15 November 2002 (21 year ago)28 February 2007 (17 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 cores64
Core clock speed2 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed200 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistorsno data120 million
Manufacturing process technology150 nm80 nm
Texture fill rateno data1.600
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data4

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
Interfaceno dataPCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDRSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount128 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed200 MHzSystem Shared
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 dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectXDDR9.0b (9_2)
OpenGLno data2.0
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

GeForce4 4200 Go 3
ATI Xpress 1250 42
+1300%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 November 2002 28 February 2007
Chip lithography 150 nm 80 nm

ATI Xpress 1250 has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 87.5% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce4 4200 Go and Radeon Xpress 1250. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce4 4200 Go is a notebook card while Radeon Xpress 1250 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 GeForce4 4200 Go
GeForce4 4200 Go
ATI Radeon Xpress 1250
Radeon Xpress 1250

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.


1 1 vote

Rate GeForce4 4200 Go on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 17 votes

Rate Radeon Xpress 1250 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.