In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE are significantly better than the AMD Radeon X1050.

The Radeon X1050 has a 125 MHz higher core clock speed than the Ti 4800, but the Ti 4800 has 4 more Texture Mapping Units than the Radeon X1050. As a result, the Ti 4800 exhibits a 0.6 GTexel/s better Texture Fill Rate than the Radeon X1050. Neither of these GPUs support DirectX 10 or higher, so Texture Rate holds more weight than when comparing more modern GPUs.

The Radeon X1050 has a 125 MHz higher core clock speed than the Ti 4800 and the same number of Render Output Units. This results in the Radeon X1050 providing 0.5 GPixel/s better pixeling performance. The Radeon X1050 supports up to DirectX 9, so pixeling performance is not particularly relevant for this GPU. It would be relevant for comparing the Ti 4800 with other old GPUs, but in this case it is probably safe to say that the Radeon X1050 is superior.

The Radeon X1050 was released over three years more recently than the Ti 4800, and so the Radeon X1050 is likely to have far better driver support, meaning it will be much more optimized and ultimately superior to the Ti 4800 when running the latest games.

Both GPUs exhibit very poor performance, so rather than upgrading from one to the other you should consider looking at more powerful GPUs. Neither of these will be able to run the latest games in any playable way.

The GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE and the Radeon X1050 have the same amount of video memory, but are likely to provide slightly different experiences when displaying game textures at high resolutions.

The Radeon X1050 has 0.9 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the Ti 4800, which means that the memory performance of the Radeon X1050 is marginally better than the Ti 4800.

Both the GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE and the Radeon X1050 have 4 Shader Processing Units. The two GPUs are based on different architectures, but deliver an equivalent shader performance. To compare, we must continue to look at the memory bandwidth, Texture and Pixel Rates. In this case, the Radeon X1050 has 0.5 GPixel/s better pixel fill rate and the Radeon X1050 has 0.9 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth, but the Ti 4800 has 0.6 GTexel/s better Texture Fill Rate. Although the GPUs are very similar in performance, the Ti 4800 takes the edge.

The Radeon X1050 transistor size technology is 40 nm (nanometers) smaller than the Ti 4800. This means that the Radeon X1050 is expected to run much cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the Ti 4800. While they exhibit similar graphical performance, the Radeon X1050 should consume less power than the Ti 4800.

The Radeon X1050 requires 24 Watts to run but there is no entry for the Ti 4800. We would recommend a PSU with at least 300 Watts for the Radeon X1050, but we do not have a recommended PSU wattage for the Ti 4800.