ATI Radeon HD 4200 vs RX 5600 XT

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 5600 XT and Radeon HD 4200, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX 5600 XT
2020, $279
6 GB GDDR6, 150 Watt
32.08
+11781%

5600 XT outperforms HD 4200 by a whopping 11781% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1891418
Place by popularity75not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation40.82no data
Power efficiency16.47no data
ArchitectureRDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameNavi 10RS880
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date21 January 2020 (6 years ago)1 August 2009 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 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 cores230440
Core clock speed1130 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed1560 MHzno data
Number of transistors10,300 million181 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Wattno data
Texture fill rate224.62.000
Floating-point processing power7.188 TFLOPS0.04 TFLOPS
ROPs644
TMUs1444
L2 Cache3 MBno 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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1x 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 typeGDDR6System Shared
Maximum RAM amount6 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width192 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed14000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+
Resizable BAR+-

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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.54.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.0
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

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.

RX 5600 XT 32.08
+11781%
ATI HD 4200 0.27

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.

RX 5600 XT 13415
+11986%
Samples: 4401
ATI HD 4200 111
Samples: 1302

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.

RX 5600 XT 86004
+36342%
ATI HD 4200 236

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 HD1060−1
1440p620−1
4K36-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.63no data
1440p4.50no data
4K7.75no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 320
+15900%
2−3
−15900%
Cyberpunk 2077 83
+8200%
1−2
−8200%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 123
+12200%
1−2
−12200%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 110−120 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 257
+12750%
2−3
−12750%
Cyberpunk 2077 74
+7300%
1−2
−7300%
Far Cry 5 148
+14700%
1−2
−14700%
Fortnite 140−150
+14600%
1−2
−14600%
Forza Horizon 4 185
+6067%
3−4
−6067%
Forza Horizon 5 104 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+1771%
7−8
−1771%
Valorant 275
+1000%
24−27
−1000%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 110−120 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 135
+13400%
1−2
−13400%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+2031%
12−14
−2031%
Cyberpunk 2077 63
+6200%
1−2
−6200%
Dota 2 185
+1956%
9−10
−1956%
Far Cry 5 135
+13400%
1−2
−13400%
Fortnite 140−150
+14600%
1−2
−14600%
Forza Horizon 4 173
+5667%
3−4
−5667%
Forza Horizon 5 91 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 126
+12500%
1−2
−12500%
Metro Exodus 81 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+1771%
7−8
−1771%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 140
+2700%
5−6
−2700%
Valorant 272
+988%
24−27
−988%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 54
+5300%
1−2
−5300%
Dota 2 168
+1767%
9−10
−1767%
Far Cry 5 126
+12500%
1−2
−12500%
Forza Horizon 4 138
+4500%
3−4
−4500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+1771%
7−8
−1771%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 84
+1580%
5−6
−1580%
Valorant 148
+492%
24−27
−492%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 140−150
+14600%
1−2
−14600%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 80
+2567%
3−4
−2567%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+22700%
1−2
−22700%
Grand Theft Auto V 61 0−1
Metro Exodus 49 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+5733%
3−4
−5733%
Valorant 252
+12500%
2−3
−12500%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 85−90 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 30 0−1
Far Cry 5 89 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 109
+10800%
1−2
−10800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+5600%
1−2
−5600%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 80−85 0−1

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 19 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 63
+350%
14−16
−350%
Metro Exodus 30 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46 0−1
Valorant 214
+21300%
1−2
−21300%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 12 0−1
Dota 2 99 0−1
Far Cry 5 45 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 70 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+3900%
1−2
−3900%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 40−45
+1900%
2−3
−1900%

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

  • in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 5600 XT is 21300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, RX 5600 XT surpassed ATI HD 4200 in all 26 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 32.08 0.27
Recency 21 January 2020 1 August 2009
Chip lithography 7 nm 55 nm

RX 5600 XT has a 11781.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 685.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 5600 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4200 in performance tests.

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 RX 5600 XT
Radeon RX 5600 XT
ATI Radeon HD 4200
Radeon HD 4200

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.


4.3 3450 votes

Rate Radeon RX 5600 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 305 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX 5600 XT or Radeon HD 4200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.