Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) vs R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)

Aggregated performance score

R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)
2014
1.08

R4 (Stoney Ridge) outperforms R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) by 8% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking10471025
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 (2014)GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)
GPU code nameBeemaStoney Ridge
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date29 April 2014 (9 years old)1 June 2016 (7 years old)

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores128192
Boost clock speed850 MHz600 MHz
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data15 Watt

Memory

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 bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Shared memory++

API support

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)12 (FL 12_0)

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 1.08
R4 (Stoney Ridge) 1.17
+8.3%

R4 (Stoney Ridge) outperforms R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) by 8% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 2698
+6.1%
R4 (Stoney Ridge) 2542

R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) outperforms R4 (Stoney Ridge) by 6% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 764
R4 (Stoney Ridge) 973
+27.3%

R4 (Stoney Ridge) outperforms R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) by 27% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 539
R4 (Stoney Ridge) 583
+8.2%

R4 (Stoney Ridge) outperforms R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) by 8% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 3317
R4 (Stoney Ridge) 3416
+3%

R4 (Stoney Ridge) outperforms R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) by 3% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 36807
R4 (Stoney Ridge) 42677
+15.9%

R4 (Stoney Ridge) outperforms R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) by 16% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

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 HD6
−50%
9
+50%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) and R4 (Stoney Ridge) compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • R4 (Stoney Ridge) is 50% faster than R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 29 tests (100%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 1.08 1.17
Recency 29 April 2014 1 June 2016

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) and Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge).


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)
Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)
AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge)
Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge)

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User Ratings

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.4 20 votes

Rate AMD Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 105 votes

Rate AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.