Radeon R5 M435 vs GeForce GT 425M

Place in the ranking	1023	872
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	4.07	no data
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code name	GF108	Jet
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	3 September 2010 (14 years ago)	15 May 2016 (8 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 cores	96	320
Core clock speed	560 MHz	780 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1030 MHz
Number of transistors	585 million	690 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	8.960	20.60
Floating-point processing power	0.215 TFLOPS	0.6592 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	8
TMUs	16	20

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 size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x8

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	DDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	1125 MHz
Memory bandwidth	25.6 GB/s	36 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	12 (11_1)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
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 1.36

R5 M435 2.14
+57.4%

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

R5 M435 821
+57.3%

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:

900p	11 −45.5%	16−18 +45.5%
Full HD	16 −50%	24−27 +50%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Elden Ring	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Dota 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Elden Ring	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −45.5%	16−18 +45.5%
Fortnite	6−7 −50%	9−10 +50%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%
Grand Theft Auto V	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 −40%	21−24 +40%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
World of Tanks	27−30 −55.2%	45−50 +55.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Dota 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −45.5%	16−18 +45.5%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 −40%	21−24 +40%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 −50%	12−14 +50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
World of Tanks	8−9 −50%	12−14 +50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Valorant	6−7 −50%	9−10 +50%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −50%	24−27 +50%
Elden Ring	0−1	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −40%	21−24 +40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −40%	21−24 +40%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 −50%	24−27 +50%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Valorant	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

This is how GT 425M and R5 M435 compete in popular games:

R5 M435 is 45% faster in 900p
R5 M435 is 50% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.36	2.14
Recency	3 September 2010	15 May 2016
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm

R5 M435 has a 57.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R5 M435 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 425M in performance tests.

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