GeForce4 4200 Go vs Radeon RX Vega 64

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 64 with GeForce4 4200 Go, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 64
2017, $499
8 GB HBM2, 295 Watt
33.26
+332500%

RX Vega 64 outperforms GeForce4 4200 Go by a whopping 332500% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1741590
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation16.62no data
Power efficiency8.68no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)no data
GPU code nameVega 10NV28M
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date7 August 2017 (8 years ago)15 November 2002 (23 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 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 cores40966
Core clock speed1247 MHz2 MHz
Boost clock speed1546 MHz200 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)295 Wattno data
Texture fill rate395.8no data
Floating-point processing power12.66 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs256no data
L1 Cache1 MBno data
L2 Cache4 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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length279 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 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 typeHBM2DDR
Maximum RAM amount8 GB128 MB
Memory bus width2048 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed945 MHz200 MHz
Memory bandwidth483.8 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortno data
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)DDR
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.1.125-

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 Vega 64 33.26
+332500%
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.

RX Vega 64 13892
+462967%
Samples: 3398
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 HD116-0−1
1440p77-0−1
4K51-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.30no data
1440p6.48no data
4K9.78no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 180−190 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80 0−1
Resident Evil 4 Remake 85−90 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 161 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 180−190 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80 0−1
Far Cry 5 110 0−1
Fortnite 150−160 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 167
+8250%
2−3
−8250%
Forza Horizon 5 100−110 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+2150%
6−7
−2150%
Valorant 315
+1270%
21−24
−1270%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 146 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 180−190 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+2989%
9−10
−2989%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80 0−1
Dota 2 150
+2043%
7−8
−2043%
Far Cry 5 104 0−1
Fortnite 150−160 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 158
+7800%
2−3
−7800%
Forza Horizon 5 100−110 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 110−120 0−1
Metro Exodus 73 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+2150%
6−7
−2150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 132
+3200%
4−5
−3200%
Valorant 293
+1174%
21−24
−1174%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 139 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80 0−1
Dota 2 138
+1871%
7−8
−1871%
Far Cry 5 98 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 128
+6300%
2−3
−6300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+2150%
6−7
−2150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 77
+1825%
4−5
−1825%
Valorant 140
+509%
21−24
−509%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 80−85
+3950%
2−3
−3950%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70 0−1
Metro Exodus 46 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
Valorant 263 0−1

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 85−90 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1
Far Cry 5 81 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 98 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
+5900%
1−2
−5900%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 85−90 0−1

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 35−40 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 70−75
+400%
14−16
−400%
Metro Exodus 46 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 48 0−1
Valorant 205 0−1

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 59 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18 0−1
Dota 2 96 0−1
Far Cry 5 44 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 66 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+4100%
1−2
−4100%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 40−45
+4100%
1−2
−4100%

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX Vega 64 is 8250% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, RX Vega 64 surpassed GeForce4 4200 Go in all 19 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.26 0.01
Recency 7 August 2017 15 November 2002
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 150 nm

RX Vega 64 has a 332500% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 971% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX Vega 64 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce4 4200 Go in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 64 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.


4.3 880 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 64 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 RX Vega 64 or GeForce4 4200 Go, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.