Radeon 8040S vs R4 (Stoney Ridge)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) and Radeon 8040S, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
8040S outperforms R4 (Stoney Ridge) by a whopping 2095% 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 | 1133 | 265 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 5.42 | 32.47 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016) | RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) |
| GPU code name | Stoney Ridge | Strix Halo |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 June 2016 (9 years ago) | 6 January 2025 (less than a 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 cores | 192 | 1024 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 1295 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 600 MHz | 2800 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 55 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 179.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 5.734 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 32 |
| TMUs | no data | 64 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 16 |
| L2 Cache | no data | 8 MB |
| L3 Cache | no data | 64 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).
| Interface | no data | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | no data | System Shared |
| 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 data | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (FL 12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.3 |
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 | 9
−2011%
| 190−200
+2011%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−2500%
|
50−55
+2500%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−700%
|
45−50
+700%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 95−100 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−2500%
|
50−55
+2500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−3750%
|
75−80
+3750%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−5800%
|
110−120
+5800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−1243%
|
90−95
+1243%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−7400%
|
75−80
+7400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−700%
|
45−50
+700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−933%
|
90−95
+933%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−416%
|
160−170
+416%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 95−100 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
−885%
|
250−260
+885%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−2500%
|
50−55
+2500%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−1900%
|
300−310
+1900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−3750%
|
75−80
+3750%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−5800%
|
110−120
+5800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−1243%
|
90−95
+1243%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−7400%
|
75−80
+7400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−700%
|
45−50
+700%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−5100%
|
50−55
+5100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−933%
|
90−95
+933%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−1083%
|
70−75
+1083%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−416%
|
160−170
+416%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 95−100 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−2500%
|
50−55
+2500%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−1900%
|
300−310
+1900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−3750%
|
75−80
+3750%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−1243%
|
90−95
+1243%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−700%
|
45−50
+700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−933%
|
90−95
+933%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−1083%
|
70−75
+1083%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−2088%
|
700−750
+2088%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−5800%
|
110−120
+5800%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−1175%
|
50−55
+1175%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 6−7
−2717%
|
160−170
+2717%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−2082%
|
240−250
+2082%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−20100%
|
200−210
+20100%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 21−24 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−5300%
|
50−55
+5300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−1933%
|
60−65
+1933%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2
−2500%
|
24−27
+2500%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−1800%
|
35−40
+1800%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−2750%
|
55−60
+2750%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−221%
|
45−50
+221%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−2680%
|
130−140
+2680%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−1150%
|
24−27
+1150%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1200%
|
24−27
+1200%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Counter-Strike 2 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
This is how R4 (Stoney Ridge) and Radeon 8040S compete in popular games:
- Radeon 8040S is 2011% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 8040S is 20100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Radeon 8040S performs better in 40 tests (73%)
- there's a draw in 15 tests (27%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.05 | 23.05 |
| Recency | 1 June 2016 | 6 January 2025 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 55 Watt |
R4 (Stoney Ridge) has 266.7% lower power consumption.
Radeon 8040S, on the other hand, has a 2095.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 600% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon 8040S is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) 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.
