ATI Radeon HD 4650 vs GeForce 920MX

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 920MX with Radeon HD 4650, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 920MX
2016
2 GB DDR3, GDDR5, 16 Watt
2.80
+352%

920MX outperforms ATI HD 4650 by a whopping 352% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7931194
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency12.110.89
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGM108RV730
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date25 March 2016 (8 years ago)10 September 2008 (16 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 cores256320
Core clock speed965 MHz600 MHz
Boost clock speed993 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data514 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)16 Watt48 Watt
Texture fill rate23.8319.20
Floating-point processing power0.5084 TFLOPS0.384 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs2432

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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data193 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDR3, GDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB256 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s22.4 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GPU Boost2.0no data
Optimus+-
GameWorks+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce 920MX 2.80
+352%
ATI HD 4650 0.62

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GeForce 920MX 1080
+354%
ATI HD 4650 238

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD17
+467%
3−4
−467%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 10
+400%
2−3
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Hitman 3 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+375%
8−9
−375%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 8
+700%
1−2
−700%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Hitman 3 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
+360%
5−6
−360%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+375%
8−9
−375%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 6
+500%
1−2
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Hitman 3 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+375%
8−9
−375%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Hitman 3 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1

This is how GeForce 920MX and ATI HD 4650 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce 920MX is 467% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.80 0.62
Recency 25 March 2016 10 September 2008
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 16 Watt 48 Watt

GeForce 920MX has a 351.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

The GeForce 920MX is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4650 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 920MX is a notebook card while Radeon HD 4650 is a desktop one.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce 920MX
GeForce 920MX
ATI Radeon HD 4650
Radeon HD 4650

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.


3.1 1040 votes

Rate GeForce 920MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 227 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4650 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.