GeForce 305M vs ATI Radeon HD 4200

VS

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
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameRS880GT218
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 August 2009 (15 years ago)10 January 2010 (14 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 cores4016
Core clock speed500 MHz525 MHz
Number of transistors181 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data14 Watt
Texture fill rate2.0004.200
Floating-point processing power0.04 TFLOPS0.0368 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data55
ROPs44
TMUs48

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).

Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
WidthIGPno 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedUp to 512 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem SharedUp to 700 (DDR3), Up to 700 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidthno data11.2 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 outputsDisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX10.1 (10_1)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.14.1
OpenGL3.32.1
OpenCL1.01.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA-+

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.

ATI HD 4200 111
GeForce 305M 150
+35.1%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 August 2009 10 January 2010
Chip lithography 55 nm 40 nm

GeForce 305M has an age advantage of 5 months, and a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 4200 and GeForce 305M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 4200 is a desktop card while GeForce 305M is a notebook 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.


ATI Radeon HD 4200
Radeon HD 4200
NVIDIA GeForce 305M
GeForce 305M

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.


3.4 246 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 4 votes

Rate GeForce 305M 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.