GeForce GT 415M vs Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge) and GeForce GT 415M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
R2 (Stoney Ridge) outperforms GT 415M by a substantial 38% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 1110 | 1170 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Power efficiency | 4.73 | 4.27 |
Architecture | GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016) | Fermi (2010−2014) |
GPU code name | Stoney Ridge | GF108 |
Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Release date | 1 June 2016 (8 years ago) | 3 September 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 cores | 128 | 48 |
Core clock speed | no data | 500 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 600 MHz | no data |
Number of transistors | 3100 Million | 585 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 12 Watt |
Texture fill rate | no data | 4.000 |
Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.096 TFLOPS |
ROPs | no data | 4 |
TMUs | no data | 8 |
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 | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
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 | no data | DDR3 |
Maximum RAM amount | no data | 512 MB |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | no data | 800 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12 (FL 12_0) | 12 (11_0) |
Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
Vulkan | + | N/A |
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.
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.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Atomic Heart | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Atomic Heart | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Valorant | 30−35
+6.9%
|
27−30
−6.9%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Atomic Heart | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
+20%
|
20−22
−20%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Dota 2 | 14−16
+15.4%
|
12−14
−15.4%
|
Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Metro Exodus | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Valorant | 30−35
+6.9%
|
27−30
−6.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Dota 2 | 14−16
+15.4%
|
12−14
−15.4%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Valorant | 30−35
+6.9%
|
27−30
−6.9%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
1440p
High Preset
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
Valorant | 1−2 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra Preset
Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
Atomic Heart | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Valorant | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R2 (Stoney Ridge) is 100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- R2 (Stoney Ridge) is ahead in 24 tests (65%)
- there's a draw in 13 tests (35%)
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 1.01 | 0.73 |
Recency | 1 June 2016 | 3 September 2010 |
Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 12 Watt |
R2 (Stoney Ridge) has a 38.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
GT 415M, on the other hand, has 25% lower power consumption.
The Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 415M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.