GeForce4 4200 Go vs Radeon R9 290X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 290X with GeForce4 4200 Go, including specs and performance data.

R9 290X
2013, $549
4 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
17.76
+177500%

R9 290X outperforms GeForce4 4200 Go by a whopping 177500% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3431590
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.31no data
Power efficiency4.72no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)no data
GPU code nameHawaiiNV28M
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date24 October 2013 (12 years ago)15 November 2002 (23 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores28166
Core clock speedno data2 MHz
Boost clock speed947 MHz200 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Wattno data
Texture fill rate176.0no data
Floating-point processing power5.632 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs176no data
L1 Cache704 KBno data
L2 Cache1024 KBno 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 datamedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pinno 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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount4 GB128 MB
Memory bus width512 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz200 MHz
Memory bandwidth320 GB/sno data
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2no data
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 12DDR
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.1no data
Vulkan+-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R9 290X 17.76
+177500%
GeForce4 4200 Go 0.01

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.

R9 290X 7425
+247400%
Samples: 479
GeForce4 4200 Go 3
Samples: 8

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 HD86-0−1
4K50-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.38no data
4K10.98no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 100−110 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1
Resident Evil 4 Remake 40−45 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 75−80 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 100−110 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1
Far Cry 5 55−60 0−1
Fortnite 95−100 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+3600%
2−3
−3600%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+1033%
6−7
−1033%
Valorant 130−140
+504%
21−24
−504%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 75−80 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 100−110 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 280
+3011%
9−10
−3011%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1
Dota 2 100−110
+1400%
7−8
−1400%
Far Cry 5 55−60 0−1
Fortnite 95−100 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+3600%
2−3
−3600%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 67 0−1
Metro Exodus 35−40 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+1033%
6−7
−1033%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75
+1775%
4−5
−1775%
Valorant 130−140
+504%
21−24
−504%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 75−80 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1
Dota 2 136
+1843%
7−8
−1843%
Far Cry 5 55−60 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+3600%
2−3
−3600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 44
+633%
6−7
−633%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+625%
4−5
−625%
Valorant 130−140
+504%
21−24
−504%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 95−100 0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+1700%
2−3
−1700%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35 0−1
Metro Exodus 21−24 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170 0−1
Valorant 170−180 0−1

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18 0−1
Far Cry 5 40−45 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 45−50 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 40−45 0−1

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 16−18 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 52
+271%
14−16
−271%
Metro Exodus 14−16 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28 0−1
Valorant 100−110 0−1

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 27−30 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 16−18 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8 0−1
Dota 2 84 0−1
Far Cry 5 20−22 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 30−35 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R9 290X is 3600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, R9 290X surpassed GeForce4 4200 Go in all 19 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.76 0.01
Recency 24 October 2013 15 November 2002
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 150 nm

R9 290X has a 177500% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 435.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R9 290X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce4 4200 Go in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 290X is a desktop graphics card while GeForce4 4200 Go is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

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.


4.1 528 votes

Rate Radeon R9 290X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate GeForce4 4200 Go on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 290X or GeForce4 4200 Go, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.