ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4850 vs HD Graphics 530

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 530 and Mobility Radeon HD 4850, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics 530
2015
64 GB DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4, 15 Watt
2.60
+57.6%

HD Graphics 530 outperforms ATI Mobility HD 4850 by an impressive 58% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking821950
Place by popularity94not in top-100
Power efficiency11.96no data
ArchitectureGeneration 9.0 (2015−2016)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameSkylake GT2M98
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 September 2015 (9 years ago)9 January 2009 (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 cores192800
Core clock speed350 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed950 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million956 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm+55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rate22.8020.00
Floating-point processing power0.3648 TFLOPS0.8 TFLOPS
ROPs316
TMUs2440

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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfaceRing BusPCIe 2.0 x16

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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount64 GB1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared850 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data54.4 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.44.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL3.01.1
Vulkan+N/A

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.

HD Graphics 530 2.60
+57.6%
ATI Mobility HD 4850 1.65

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

HD Graphics 530 6831
+29.8%
ATI Mobility HD 4850 5264

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 HD13
−200%
39
+200%
4K7
+75%
4−5
−75%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Elden Ring 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Dota 2 8
+300%
2−3
−300%
Elden Ring 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+25%
12−14
−25%
Fortnite 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 26
+52.9%
16−18
−52.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
World of Tanks 45−50
+45.5%
30−35
−45.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Dota 2 20
+900%
2−3
−900%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+25%
12−14
−25%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+41.2%
16−18
−41.2%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring 2−3 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+63.6%
10−12
−63.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
World of Tanks 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Valorant 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 7
−129%
16−18
+129%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Fortnite 1−2 0−1
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how HD Graphics 530 and ATI Mobility HD 4850 compete in popular games:

  • ATI Mobility HD 4850 is 200% faster in 1080p
  • HD Graphics 530 is 75% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD Graphics 530 is 900% faster.
  • in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the ATI Mobility HD 4850 is 129% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 530 is ahead in 38 tests (79%)
  • ATI Mobility HD 4850 is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
  • there's a draw in 8 tests (17%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.60 1.65
Recency 1 September 2015 9 January 2009
Maximum RAM amount 64 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 55 nm

HD Graphics 530 has a 57.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.

The HD Graphics 530 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 4850 in performance tests.


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.


Intel HD Graphics 530
HD Graphics 530
ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4850
Mobility Radeon HD 4850

Other comparisons

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 1569 votes

Rate HD Graphics 530 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 4 votes

Rate Mobility Radeon HD 4850 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.