Radeon R4 (Beema) vs HD 6770M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6770M and Radeon R4 (Beema), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 6770M
2011
1 GB GDDR5, 35 Watt
2.50
+140%

HD 6770M outperforms R4 (Beema) by a whopping 140% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8321101
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.89no data
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)GCN 1.1 (2014)
GPU code nameWhistlerBeema
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date4 January 2011 (13 years ago)29 April 2014 (10 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 cores480128
Core clock speed725 MHz800 MHz
Number of transistors716 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Wattno data
Texture fill rate17.40no data
Floating-point processing power0.696 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs24no data

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)no 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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount1 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth57.6 GB/sno data
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 outputsno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (FL 12_0)
Shader Model5.0no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCL1.2no data
VulkanN/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 6770M 2.50
+140%
R4 (Beema) 1.04

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 6770M 964
+142%
R4 (Beema) 399

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD 6770M 1328
+85.5%
R4 (Beema) 716

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 6770M 6107
+144%
R4 (Beema) 2506

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 6770M 980
+97.2%
R4 (Beema) 497

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:

900p23
+156%
9−10
−156%
Full HD24
+200%
8
−200%
1200p12
+200%
4−5
−200%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+15.6%
30−35
−15.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+15.6%
30−35
−15.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+15.6%
30−35
−15.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

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

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

4K
High Preset

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

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

This is how HD 6770M and R4 (Beema) compete in popular games:

  • HD 6770M is 156% faster in 900p
  • HD 6770M is 200% faster in 1080p
  • HD 6770M is 200% faster in 1200p

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

  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD 6770M is 500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD 6770M is ahead in 42 tests (98%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.50 1.04
Recency 4 January 2011 29 April 2014
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm

HD 6770M has a 140.4% higher aggregate performance score.

R4 (Beema), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 6770M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R4 (Beema) 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 6770M
Radeon HD 6770M
AMD Radeon R4 (Beema)
Radeon R4 (Beema)

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.


3.5 82 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6770M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 74 votes

Rate Radeon R4 (Beema) 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.