RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile vs Radeon R4 Graphics

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated106
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data23.87
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameBeemano data
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date11 June 2014 (10 years ago)21 March 2023 (1 year 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 cores1283072
Core clock speed800 MHzno data
Number of transistors930 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt115 Watt (35 - 115 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate6.400no data
Floating-point processing power0.2048 TFLOPSno data
ROPs4no data
TMUs8no data

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceIGPno data
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 SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared16000 MHz
Shared memoryno data-

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 outputsno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 11 June 2014 21 March 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 115 Watt

R4 Graphics has 666.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R4 Graphics and RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R4 Graphics is a desktop card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 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.


AMD Radeon R4 Graphics
Radeon R4 Graphics
NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile

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.


2.7 1193 votes

Rate Radeon R4 Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 18 votes

Rate RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 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.