Radeon RX Vega 3 vs GeForce4 410 Go

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated779
Place by popularitynot in top-10085
Power efficiencyno data13.61
ArchitectureCelsius (1999−2005)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameNV17 A3Picasso
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date6 February 2002 (22 years ago)6 January 2019 (5 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 coresno data192
Core clock speed200 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1001 MHz
Number of transistors29 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology150 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data15 Watt
Texture fill rate0.812.01
Floating-point processing powerno data0.3844 TFLOPS
ROPs24
TMUs412

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).

InterfaceAGP 4xIGP
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDRSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount16 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed200 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth3.2 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno 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.

DirectX8.012 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGL1.34.6
OpenCLN/A2.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 February 2002 6 January 2019
Chip lithography 150 nm 14 nm

RX Vega 3 has an age advantage of 16 years, and a 971.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce4 410 Go and Radeon RX Vega 3. 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.

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 GeForce4 410 Go
GeForce4 410 Go
AMD Radeon RX Vega 3
Radeon RX Vega 3

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate GeForce4 410 Go on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 2002 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 3 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.