GeForce GT 420 OEM vs Radeon VII

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking84not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation26.02no data
Power efficiency10.56no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.1 (2018−2022)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameVega 20GF108
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date7 February 2019 (5 years ago)3 September 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$699 no data

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 cores384048
Core clock speed1400 MHz700 MHz
Boost clock speed1750 MHzno data
Number of transistors13,230 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)295 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate420.02.800
Floating-point processing power13.44 TFLOPS0.1344 TFLOPS
ROPs644
TMUs2404

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length280 mm145 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinNone

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 typeHBM2DDR3
Maximum RAM amount16 GB1 GB
Memory bus width4096 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth1024 GB/s28.8 GB/s

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 HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.75.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.11.1
Vulkan1.3N/A
CUDA-2.1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 February 2019 3 September 2010
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 7 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 295 Watt 50 Watt

Radeon VII has an age advantage of 8 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

GT 420 OEM, on the other hand, has 490% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon VII and GeForce GT 420 OEM. 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 VII
Radeon VII
NVIDIA GeForce GT 420 OEM
GeForce GT 420 OEM

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.


2.9 2855 votes

Rate Radeon VII on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 176 votes

Rate GeForce GT 420 OEM 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.