ATI Radeon HD 4650 vs HD 8240

Place in the ranking	1190	1196
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	2.98	0.90
Architecture	GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)	TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code name	Kalindi	RV730
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	1 November 2013 (11 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 cores	128	320
Core clock speed	400 MHz	600 MHz
Number of transistors	1,178 million	514 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	48 Watt
Texture fill rate	3.200	19.20
Floating-point processing power	0.1024 TFLOPS	0.384 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	8
TMUs	8	32

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	IGP	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	193 mm
Width	IGP	1-slot

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	System Shared	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	256 MB
Memory bus width	System Shared	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	700 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	22.4 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 Connectors

No outputs

2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	6.3	4.1
OpenGL	4.6	3.3
OpenCL	2.0	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	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 8240 0.64
+3.2%

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.

HD 8240 246
+3.4%

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.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4
+50%

2−3

−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 +11.1%	27−30 −11.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 +11.1%	27−30 −11.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Hitman 3	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 +11.1%	27−30 −11.1%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4
+50%

2−3

−50%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3
+100%

1−2

−100%

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.64	0.62
Recency	1 November 2013	10 September 2008
Chip lithography	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	48 Watt

HD 8240 has a 3.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 220% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon HD 8240 and Radeon HD 4650.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.