Radeon Graphics vs GeForce GT 425M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 425M with Radeon Graphics, including specs and performance data.

GT 425M
2010
1 GB DDR3, 23 Watt
1.35

Graphics outperforms GT 425M by a considerable 47% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1018897
Place by popularitynot in top-10010
Power efficiency4.099.21
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGF108Renoir
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date3 September 2010 (14 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)

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 cores96448
Core clock speed560 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1500 MHz
Number of transistors585 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate8.96042.00
Floating-point processing power0.215 TFLOPS1.344 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs1628

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16IGP
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed800 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GT 425M 1.35
Radeon Graphics 1.98
+46.7%

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.

GT 425M 522
Radeon Graphics 764
+46.4%

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:

900p11
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%
Full HD17
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hitman 3 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−36.4%
45−50
+36.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hitman 3 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−36.4%
45−50
+36.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hitman 3 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−36.4%
45−50
+36.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

This is how GT 425M and Graphics compete in popular games:

  • Graphics is 45% faster in 900p
  • Graphics is 41% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.35 1.98
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 15 Watt

Graphics has a 46.7% higher aggregate performance score, a 471.4% more advanced lithography process, and 53.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Graphics is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 425M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 425M is a notebook card while Radeon Graphics is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


NVIDIA GeForce GT 425M
GeForce GT 425M
AMD Radeon Graphics
Radeon Graphics

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.4 58 votes

Rate GeForce GT 425M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 6245 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.