GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile vs ATI Radeon 9200 SE

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1548136
Place by popularitynot in top-10048
Power efficiencyno data51.28
ArchitectureRage 7 (2001−2006)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameRV280AD107
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 March 2003 (22 years ago)3 January 2023 (2 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 data2560
Core clock speed200 MHz1455 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1755 MHz
Number of transistors36 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology150 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate0.8140.4
Floating-point processing powerno data8.986 TFLOPS
ROPs448
TMUs480
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Coresno data20

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 4.0 x8
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount64 MB6 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed166 MHz16000 GB/s
Memory bandwidth2.656 GB/s192.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX8.112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGL1.44.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.9
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

ATI 9200 SE 2
RTX 4050 Mobile 14420
+720900%

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 HDno data96
1440pno data50
4Kno data30

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 132
+0%
132
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 103
+0%
103
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 124
+0%
124
+0%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 166
+0%
166
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 82
+0%
82
+0%
Far Cry 5 125
+0%
125
+0%
Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 115
+0%
115
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 72
+0%
72
+0%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 112
+0%
112
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 69
+0%
69
+0%
Dota 2 169
+0%
169
+0%
Far Cry 5 118
+0%
118
+0%
Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 108
+0%
108
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 125
+0%
125
+0%
Metro Exodus 85
+0%
85
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 156
+0%
156
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 65
+0%
65
+0%
Dota 2 162
+0%
162
+0%
Far Cry 5 109
+0%
109
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80
+0%
80
+0%
Valorant 138
+0%
138
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 79
+0%
79
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 58
+0%
58
+0%
Metro Exodus 50
+0%
50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 37
+0%
37
+0%
Far Cry 5 69
+0%
69
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 59
+0%
59
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24
+0%
24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 64
+0%
64
+0%
Metro Exodus 45
+0%
45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 47
+0%
47
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Dota 2 115
+0%
115
+0%
Far Cry 5 43
+0%
43
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 March 2003 3 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount 64 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 150 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 50 Watt

ATI 9200 SE has 78.6% lower power consumption.

RTX 4050 Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 19 years, a 9500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 2900% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon 9200 SE and GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon 9200 SE is a desktop card while GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile is a notebook one.

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.


ATI Radeon 9200 SE
Radeon 9200 SE
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile
GeForce RTX 4050

Other comparisons

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.


4.2 69 votes

Rate Radeon 9200 SE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 3098 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon 9200 SE or GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.