Radeon RX 590 vs NVS 4200M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 4200M with Radeon RX 590, including specs and performance data.

NVS 4200M
2011
1 GB DDR3, 25 Watt
0.73

RX 590 outperforms NVS 4200M by a whopping 3234% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1160228
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data25.32
Power efficiency2.029.63
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGF119Polaris 30
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date22 February 2011 (13 years ago)15 November 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$279

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores482304
Core clock speed810 MHz1469 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1545 MHz
Number of transistors292 million5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate6.480222.5
Floating-point processing power0.1555 TFLOPS7.119 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs8144

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
InterfaceMXMPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data241 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 8-pin

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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/s256.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.1-

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.

NVS 4200M 0.73
RX 590 24.34
+3234%

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.

NVS 4200M 280
RX 590 9389
+3253%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

NVS 4200M 507
RX 590 23363
+4508%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

NVS 4200M 2298
RX 590 48454
+2009%

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:

Full HD13
−662%
99
+662%
1440p1−2
−5500%
56
+5500%
4K1−2
−3500%
36
+3500%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.82
1440pno data4.98
4Kno data7.75

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1233%
40−45
+1233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−1525%
65
+1525%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2200%
69
+2200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1233%
40−45
+1233%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−8900%
90
+8900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−880%
45−50
+880%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−2636%
301
+2636%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 91
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−2233%
140
+2233%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−777%
272
+777%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−2725%
113
+2725%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2033%
64
+2033%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1233%
40−45
+1233%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−7000%
71
+7000%
Hitman 3 5−6
−880%
45−50
+880%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−2509%
287
+2509%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 74
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−1800%
114
+1800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−430%
50−55
+430%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−742%
261
+742%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−875%
39
+875%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−1433%
46
+1433%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1233%
40−45
+1233%
Hitman 3 5−6
−880%
45−50
+880%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−773%
96
+773%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−1567%
100
+1567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−410%
51
+410%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−12.9%
35
+12.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 64

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−3600%
35−40
+3600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 24−27
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1400%
14−16
+1400%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−2700%
27−30
+2700%
Hitman 3 6−7
−383%
27−30
+383%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−2300%
72
+2300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−10050%
203
+10050%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−1333%
43
+1333%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 26

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1800%
19
+1800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 42

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−1400%
30
+1400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 86
+0%
86
+0%
Battlefield 5 136
+0%
136
+0%
Far Cry 5 90
+0%
90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 274
+0%
274
+0%
Metro Exodus 124
+0%
124
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 73
+0%
73
+0%
Battlefield 5 122
+0%
122
+0%
Far Cry 5 74
+0%
74
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 259
+0%
259
+0%
Metro Exodus 97
+0%
97
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 62
+0%
62
+0%
Far Cry 5 55
+0%
55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 91
+0%
91
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55
+0%
55
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 38
+0%
38
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 58
+0%
58
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 70
+0%
70
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 39
+0%
39
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 57
+0%
57
+0%
Metro Exodus 36
+0%
36
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 32
+0%
32
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20
+0%
20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 17
+0%
17
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 46
+0%
46
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40
+0%
40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 13
+0%
13
+0%

This is how NVS 4200M and RX 590 compete in popular games:

  • RX 590 is 662% faster in 1080p
  • RX 590 is 5500% faster in 1440p
  • RX 590 is 3500% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 590 is 10050% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 590 is ahead in 35 tests (53%)
  • there's a draw in 31 test (47%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.73 24.34
Recency 22 February 2011 15 November 2018
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 175 Watt

NVS 4200M has 600% lower power consumption.

RX 590, on the other hand, has a 3234.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 590 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 4200M in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 4200M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 590 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 NVS 4200M
NVS 4200M
AMD Radeon RX 590
Radeon RX 590

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.


3.1 128 votes

Rate NVS 4200M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 2443 votes

Rate Radeon RX 590 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.