ATI Radeon HD 4350 vs HD 6750

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6750 and Radeon HD 4350, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 6750
2011
2 GB GDDR5, 86 Watt
2.71
+632%

HD 6750 outperforms ATI HD 4350 by a whopping 632% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8071273
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.15no data
Power efficiency2.161.27
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameJuniperRV710
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date21 January 2011 (13 years ago)30 September 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$49.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores72080
Core clock speedno data600 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,040 million242 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)86 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate25.204.800
Floating-point processing power1.008 TFLOPS0.096 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs368

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 supportPCIe 2.0 x16no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length170 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1050 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth73.6 GB/s6.4 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort2x DisplayPort
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1110.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.04.1
OpenGL4.43.3
OpenCL1.21.1
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 6750 2.71
+632%
ATI HD 4350 0.37

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.

HD 6750 1043
+635%
ATI HD 4350 142

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 HD40−45
+567%
6
−567%

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.25no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how HD 6750 and ATI HD 4350 compete in popular games:

  • HD 6750 is 567% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 29 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.71 0.37
Recency 21 January 2011 30 September 2008
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 86 Watt 20 Watt

HD 6750 has a 632.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.

ATI HD 4350, on the other hand, has 330% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 6750 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4350 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.


AMD Radeon HD 6750
Radeon HD 6750
ATI Radeon HD 4350
Radeon HD 4350

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.


3.4 286 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 220 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4350 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.