GeForce4 MX 4000 vs Radeon HD 8280

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1176not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.09no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Celsius (1999−2005)
GPU code nameKalindiNV18 A4
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date18 September 2013 (11 years ago)14 December 2003 (20 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 cores128no data
Core clock speed450 MHz250 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million29 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rate3.6001.000
Floating-point processing power0.1152 TFLOPSno data
ROPs42
TMUs84

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).

InterfaceIGPAGP 8x
Lengthno data168 mm
WidthIGP1-slot
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 typeSystem SharedDDR
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared128 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared166 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data2.656 GB/s
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 outputs1x VGA

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)8.0
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.61.3
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

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.

HD 8280 260
+6400%
GeForce4 MX 4000 4

Pros & cons summary


Recency 18 September 2013 14 December 2003
Chip lithography 28 nm 150 nm

HD 8280 has an age advantage of 9 years, and a 435.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 8280 and GeForce4 MX 4000. 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.


AMD Radeon HD 8280
Radeon HD 8280
NVIDIA GeForce4 MX 4000
GeForce4 MX 4000

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.


2.2 14 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 938 votes

Rate GeForce4 MX 4000 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.