GeForce4 420 Go vs Radeon Xpress 200M
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | no data | Celsius (1999−2005) |
| GPU code name | RC410 | NV17M |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 18 February 2005 (19 years ago) | 1 March 2002 (22 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
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 cores | 6 | 2 |
| Core clock speed | 2 MHz | 200 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 350 MHz | 190 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 107 million | 29 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 130 nm | 150 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 0.67 | 0.8 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Radeon Xpress 200M and GeForce4 420 Go compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | AGP 4x |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no 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 type | no data | DDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | 0 MB | 64 MB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 32 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 400 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 3.2 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 9.0 (9_0) | 8.0 |
| OpenGL | 2.0 | 1.3 |
| OpenCL | N/A | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
Radeon Xpress 200M outperforms GeForce4 420 Go by 633% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 18 February 2005 | 1 March 2002 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 150 nm |
We couldn't decide between Radeon Xpress 200M and GeForce4 420 Go. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
