Radeon HD 4670 vs GeForce GT 220

Place in performance ranking	1174	1074
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.01
Architecture	GT2xx (2009−2012)	TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code name	GT216	RV730
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	12 October 2009 (14 years ago)	10 September 2008 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$79.99	$67

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GT 220 and ATI HD 4670 have a nearly equal value for money.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	48	320
Core clock speed	615 MHz	750 MHz
Number of transistors	486 million	514 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	58 Watt	59 Watt
Texture fill rate	9.840	24.00
Floating-point performance	144 gflops	480.0 gflops

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	168 mm	193 mm
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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 type	DDR3	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	512 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	790 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	32 GB/s	32 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA	2x DVI, 1x S-Video
HDMI	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	4.1	4.1
OpenGL	3.3	3.3
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	1.2	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

GT 220 0.57

ATI HD 4670 0.98
+71.9%

Radeon HD 4670 outperforms GeForce GT 220 by 72% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GT 220 219

ATI HD 4670 380
+73.5%

Radeon HD 4670 outperforms GeForce GT 220 by 74% in Passmark.

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 HD

−66.7%

35−40
+66.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−66.7%

5−6
+66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Hitman 3	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −50%	12−14 +50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −60%	8−9 +60%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 −60%	16−18 +60%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Hitman 3	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −50%	12−14 +50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −60%	8−9 +60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 −60%	16−18 +60%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −50%	12−14 +50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −60%	8−9 +60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 −60%	16−18 +60%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

4−5

−50%

6−7
+50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Hitman 3	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%