GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce 820A and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 represent two extremes of the GPU spectrum, separated by a decade of architectural evolution. The 820A is an end-of-life, integrated-class part from 2014, while the RTX 4010 is an active, single-slot discrete GPU from 2024. The data shows a massive generational gap: the RTX 4010 delivers 2.706 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 240.0 GFLOPS for the 820A, a 11.3x raw compute advantage. The RTX 4010 is the clear choice for any modern workload, while the 820A is only relevant in legacy, low-power embedded systems. Benchmark positions confirm this, with the 820A at the 19th percentile and the RTX 4010 at the 18th percentile of all GPUs, though their specific benchmark scores are from different tests and not directly comparable.

The Verdict

The data dictates a stark verdict: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 is the only sensible choice for any contemporary application. Its Ampere architecture, 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, and 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth place it in a completely different performance class than the Fermi 2.0-based 820A. The RTX 4010 features 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, compared to the 820A's 96 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This translates to a pixel rate of 28.19 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 42.29 GTexel/s for the RTX 4010, versus 2.500 GPixel/s and 10.00 GTexel/s for the 820A. The RTX 4010 also supports modern APIs including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the 820A is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and has no Vulkan support listed. For anyone building a system today, the 820A is obsolete. The RTX 4010, while not a high-end performer, is the only viable option for a low-profile, power-efficient GPU with modern feature support. The 820A should only be considered for maintaining or repairing a decade-old system where the 15 W TDP and IGP form factor are mandatory.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor count?

A: The RTX 4010 uses 8,700 million transistors on its GA107 chip, while the 820A uses only 585 million transistors on its GF117 chip. This 14.9x difference is a primary driver of the performance gap.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The RTX 4010 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The 820A has 1024 MB of DDR3 memory on the same 64-bit bus, providing only 16.02 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The RTX 4010 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the 820A supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The RTX 4010 also lists Vulkan 1.4 support, whereas the 820A has no Vulkan API listed.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The 820A has a 15 W TDP and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor), requiring no power connectors. The RTX 4010 has a 50 W TDP, a single-slot form factor, and also requires no power connectors, though a 250 W PSU is suggested.

Q: Which GPU has a higher benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The 820A ranks at the 19th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 2983. The RTX 4010 ranks at the 18th percentile with an average score of 2893. These scores are from different benchmark suites, so they are not directly comparable.

Q: What are the physical dimensions of the RTX 4010?

A: The RTX 4010 is 163 mm (6.4 inches) long and 69 mm (2.7 inches) high. The 820A has no listed dimensions, as it is a portable-device-dependent IGP.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two GPUs is immense. The 820A is built on the Fermi 2.0 architecture using a 28 nm process node at TSMC, a design that dates back to 2014. In contrast, the RTX 4010 uses the modern Ampere architecture on an 8 nm node from Samsung. This process shrink allows the RTX 4010 to pack 43.5 million transistors per square millimeter, compared to just 5.0 million per square millimeter on the 820A. The die sizes reflect this: the 820A's GF117 chip is 116 mm², while the RTX 4010's GA107 chip is 200 mm². The RTX 4010 also introduces dedicated hardware absent from the 820A: 6 RT cores for ray tracing and 24 tensor cores for AI acceleration. The 820A has no such specialized units. Furthermore, the RTX 4010 supports FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, offering 2.706 TFLOPS in both precision modes, while the 820A has no FP16 capability listed. The memory architectures differ as well, with the 820A using slow DDR3 and the RTX 4010 using high-speed GDDR6, which is a fundamental factor in the bandwidth disparity.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ on nearly every measurable specification. The 820A has a memory size of 1024 MB, while the RTX 4010 has 4 GB. Memory type is DDR3 versus GDDR6. The 820A's memory clock is 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective), while the RTX 4010's is 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). Bandwidth is 16.02 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s. The core configs are drastically different: 96 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs for the 820A, versus 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs for the RTX 4010. The RTX 4010 has a base clock of 1417 MHz and a boost clock of 1762 MHz, while the 820A has no listed base or boost clocks. The process node, foundry, transistor count, die size, and transistor density all differ, as detailed above. The bus interface is PCIe 2.0 x16 for the 820A and PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RTX 4010. Display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent" for the 820A, versus 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a for the RTX 4010. The 820A has a 15 W TDP and an IGP slot width, while the RTX 4010 has a 50 W TDP and is single-slot. The RTX 4010 also has a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the 820A has none listed. The release dates are 2014-03-16 for the 820A and 2024-04-15 for the RTX 4010. Finally, the RTX 4010 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the 820A only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0) and lacks Vulkan.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There are no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two GPUs, as they were never tested against each other in a common suite. The 820A's single benchmark is a Geekbench OpenCL score of 2983, while the RTX 4010's is a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2893. These tests measure different aspects of performance and cannot be compared numerically. However, we can use their nearest rival data to contextualize their standing. The 820A's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M, which scores 2967, a 0.5% difference. It also sits near the GeForce GTX 750 Ti (2953, 1% delta) and the Quadro P600 (2923, 2.1% delta). Notably, the 820A is 2.4% ahead of the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB (2913) in this OpenCL test. The RTX 4010's Steel Nomad score of 2893 places it 0.5% behind the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB (2907), 0.6% behind the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF (2910), and 0.7% behind the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB (2913). The RTX 4010 is 1% behind the Quadro P600 (2923). The raw compute figures provide the clearest comparison: the RTX 4010's 2.706 TFLOPS FP32 is 11.3x higher than the 820A's 240.0 GFLOPS. Texture fill rate is 42.29 GTexel/s versus 10.00 GTexel/s, a 4.2x gap. Pixel fill rate is 28.19 GPixel/s versus 2.500 GPixel/s, an 11.3x gap. These figures unequivocally demonstrate the RTX 4010's dominance in every measurable compute category. The 820A's only advantages are its lower TDP (15 W vs 50 W) and its integrated form factor, which are irrelevant for performance comparisons.