Radeon HD 4770 vs GeForce FX 5200 Low Profile |
VS
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Significantly higher clock speed | 750 MHz | vs | 250 MHz | 3x higher clock speed | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much higher effective memory clock speed | 3,200 MHz | vs | 400 MHz | 8x higher effective memory clock speed | |||
| Higher memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | vs | 3.2 GB/s | 16x higher memory bandwidth | |||
| Much higher memory clock speed | 800 MHz | vs | 200 MHz | 4x higher memory clock speed | |||
| Higher pixel rate | 12 GPixel/s | vs | 1 GPixel/s | 12x higher pixel rate | |||
| Higher texture rate | 24 GTexel/s | vs | 1 GTexel/s | 24x higher texture rate | |||
| More render output processors | 16 | vs | 4 | 12 more render output processors | |||
| More texture mapping units | 32 | vs | 4 | 28 more texture mapping units | |||
| Wider memory bus | 128 bit | vs | 64 bit | 2x wider memory bus | |||
| |||||||
| GPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 Low Profile vs the ATi Radeon HD 4770. | |||||||
Report a correction
Features Key features of the Radeon HD 4770 vs GeForce FX 5200 Low Profile
effective memory clock speed Frequency at which memory can be read from and written to
memory bandwidth Rate at which data can be read from or stored in onboard memory
pixel rate Number of pixels a graphics card can render to the screen every second
texture rate Speed at which a graphics card can perform texture mapping
texture mapping units Built into each gpu, these resize and rotate bitmaps for texturing scenes
render output processors GPU commponents responsible for transform pixels as they flow between memory buffers
Specifications Full list of technical specs
gpu | Radeon HD 4770 | vs | GeForce FX 5200 Low Profile |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPU brand | ATI | Nvidia | |
| GPU name | RV740 | NV34 | |
| Market | Desktop | Desktop | |
| Clock speed | 750 MHz | 250 MHz | |
| Is dual GPU | No | No | |
| Reference card | None | None | |
raw performance | |||
| Texture mapping units | 32 | 4 | |
| Render output processors | 16 | 4 | |
| Pixel rate | 12 GPixel/s | 1 GPixel/s | |
| Texture rate | 24 GTexel/s | 1 GTexel/s | |
memory | Radeon HD 4770 | vs | GeForce FX 5200 Low Profile |
|---|---|---|---|
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 200 MHz | |
| Effective memory clock speed | 3,200 MHz | 400 MHz | |
| Memory bus | 128 bit | 64 bit | |
| Memory | 512 MB | 64 MB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 3.2 GB/s |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $98 | ||
| 4770 vs 730 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $274 | ||
| 4770 vs 750 Ti | ||
| | VS |  |
| 4770 vs 9800 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $54 | ||
| FX 5200 Low Profile vs 210 | ||
| | VS | |
| $98 | ||
| FX 5200 Low Profile vs 730 | ||
| | VS |  |
| FX 5200 Low Profile vs 1050 Ti | ||
| | VS |  |
| FX 5200 Low Profile vs RX 480 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS | |
| $304 | ||
| 1060 vs 1050 Ti | ||
 | VS | |
| 970 vs 1050 Ti | ||
| | VS | |
| $304 | ||
| 970 vs 1060 | ||
 | VS | |
| 960 vs 1050 Ti | ||
| | VS | |
| 970 vs 960 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $304 | ||
| 1060 vs RX 580 | ||
| | VS |  |
| 970 vs R9 390 | ||
