Radeon Steam Deck 8CU vs NVS 4200M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared NVS 4200M with Radeon Steam Deck 8CU, including specs and performance data.
Steam Deck 8CU outperforms 4200M by a whopping 1293% 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 | 1215 | 480 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.25 | no data |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | RDNA 2 (2022−2023) |
| GPU code name | GF119 | RDNA 2 Sephiroth |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 22 February 2011 (14 years ago) | 9 November 2023 (2 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 | 48 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 810 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1900 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 292 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 6.480 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1555 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | no data |
| TMUs | 8 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 1 MB |
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 | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | MXM | no data |
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 | DDR3 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 12.8 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | + |
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 data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12_1 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | no data |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
| CUDA | 2.1 | - |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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 | 13
−123%
| 29
+123%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−950%
|
21−24
+950%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−950%
|
21−24
+950%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 1−2
−4100%
|
40−45
+4100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−3300%
|
30−35
+3300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−800%
|
45−50
+800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−363%
|
35−40
+363%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−234%
|
95−100
+234%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
−633%
|
150−160
+633%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−950%
|
21−24
+950%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−1285%
|
180−190
+1285%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 1−2
−4100%
|
40−45
+4100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−2600%
|
27
+2600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−800%
|
45−50
+800%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−2000%
|
21−24
+2000%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−363%
|
35−40
+363%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−350%
|
27−30
+350%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−234%
|
95−100
+234%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−950%
|
21−24
+950%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−1285%
|
180−190
+1285%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 1−2
−4100%
|
40−45
+4100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−2200%
|
23
+2200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−800%
|
45−50
+800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−363%
|
35−40
+363%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−350%
|
27−30
+350%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−234%
|
95−100
+234%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−533%
|
18−20
+533%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 4−5
−1875%
|
75−80
+1875%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−588%
|
55−60
+588%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 9−10 |
| Escape from Tarkov | 2−3
−900%
|
20−22
+900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 21−24 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−1150%
|
24−27
+1150%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−600%
|
14−16
+600%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−2100%
|
21−24
+2100%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−50%
|
21−24
+50%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−400%
|
10−11
+400%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−400%
|
10−11
+400%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 10
+0%
|
10
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
This is how NVS 4200M and Steam Deck 8CU compete in popular games:
- Steam Deck 8CU is 123% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Escape from Tarkov, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Steam Deck 8CU is 4100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Steam Deck 8CU performs better in 34 tests (58%)
- there's a draw in 25 tests (42%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.73 | 10.17 |
| Recency | 22 February 2011 | 9 November 2023 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 6 nm |
Steam Deck 8CU has a 1293.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon Steam Deck 8CU is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 4200M in performance tests.
Be aware that NVS 4200M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon Steam Deck 8CU 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.
