RADEON 9200 vs GeForce4 MX 420
RADEON 9200
Popular choices:
GeForce4 MX 420
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The RADEON 9200 is positioned at rank 748 and the GeForce4 MX 420 is on rank 747, so the GeForce4 MX 420 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar RADEON 9200
Performance Per Dollar GeForce4 MX 420
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce4 MX 420 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 25% higher G3D Mark score. However, the RADEON 9200 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | RADEON 9200 | GeForce4 MX 420 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-25%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+25%) |
| Longevity | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) (28nm) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+296.8%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce4 MX 420 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $10 versus $25 for the RADEON 9200, it costs 60% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 212.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | RADEON 9200 | GeForce4 MX 420 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+212.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($25) | ✅More affordable ($10) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of RADEON 9200 and GeForce4 MX 420
RADEON 9200
The RADEON 9200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 13 2019. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 730 MHz to 1024 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4 points.
GeForce4 MX 420
The GeForce4 MX 420 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 1 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1395 MHz to 1575 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 25W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the RADEON 9200 scores 4 versus the GeForce4 MX 420's 5 — the GeForce4 MX 420 leads by 25%. The RADEON 9200 is built on GCN 3.0 while the GeForce4 MX 420 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 384 (RADEON 9200) vs 896 (GeForce4 MX 420). Raw compute: 0.7864 TFLOPS (RADEON 9200) vs 3.226 TFLOPS (GeForce4 MX 420). Boost clocks: 1024 MHz vs 1575 MHz.
| Feature | RADEON 9200 | GeForce4 MX 420 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4 | 5+25% |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 896+133% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7864 TFLOPS | 3.226 TFLOPS+310% |
| Boost Clock | 1024 MHz | 1575 MHz+54% |
| ROPs | 8 | 32+300% |
| TMUs | 24 | 64+167% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | RADEON 9200 | GeForce4 MX 420 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The RADEON 9200 comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce4 MX 420 has 65 MB. The RADEON 9200 offers 296.8% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | RADEON 9200 | GeForce4 MX 420 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB+297% | 0.063 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The RADEON 9200 draws 50W versus the GeForce4 MX 420's 25W — a 66.7% difference. The GeForce4 MX 420 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (RADEON 9200) vs 350W (GeForce4 MX 420). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | RADEON 9200 | GeForce4 MX 420 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W | 25W-50% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | PCIe-powered |
| Height | — | 100mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 60°C |
| Perf/Watt | 0.1 | 0.2+100% |
Value Analysis
The RADEON 9200 launched at $99 MSRP and currently averages $25, while the GeForce4 MX 420 launched at $99 and now averages $10. The GeForce4 MX 420 costs 60% less ($15 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.2 (RADEON 9200) vs 0.5 (GeForce4 MX 420) — the GeForce4 MX 420 offers 150% better value. The GeForce4 MX 420 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2019).
| Feature | RADEON 9200 | GeForce4 MX 420 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $99 | $99 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $25 | $10-60% |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.2 | 0.5+150% |
| Codename | Polaris 24 | N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1 |
| Release | May 13 2019 | August 1 2020 |
| Ranking | #898 | #523 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on RADEON 9200 and GeForce4 MX 420
