Quadro4 900 XGL vs Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge) with Quadro4 900 XGL, including specs and performance data.
R2 (Stoney Ridge) outperforms Quadro4 900 XGL by a whopping 9400% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1174 | 1585 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 4.88 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016) | Kelvin (2001−2003) |
| GPU code name | Stoney Ridge | NV25 A2 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 1 June 2016 (9 years ago) | 19 February 2002 (24 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 | 128 | no data |
| Core clock speed | no data | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 600 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 3100 Million | 63 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 150 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 2.400 |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 8 |
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).
| Interface | no data | AGP 4x |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | no data | DDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 128 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 325 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 10.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | no data |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (FL 12_0) | 8.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 1.3 |
| OpenCL | no data | N/A |
| Vulkan | + | N/A |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 30−35 | 0−1 |
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 30−35 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 30−35 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 5−6 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.95 | 0.01 |
| Recency | 1 June 2016 | 19 February 2002 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 150 nm |
R2 (Stoney Ridge) has a 9400% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, and a 436% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge) is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro4 900 XGL in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge) is a notebook graphics card while Quadro4 900 XGL is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
