ATI Radeon E4690 vs R3 (Mullins/Beema)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R3 (Mullins/Beema) with Radeon E4690, including specs and performance data.
E4690 outperforms R3 (Mullins/Beema) by a significant 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1214 | 1166 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 2.49 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.1 (2014) | TeraScale (2005−2013) |
| GPU code name | Beema/Mullins | RV730 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 29 April 2014 (11 years ago) | 1 June 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 cores | 128 | 320 |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 686 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 514 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 30 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 19.20 |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 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 | no data | MXM-II |
| Width | no data | MXM Module |
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 | no data | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 1400 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 22.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (FL 12_0) | 10.1 |
| Shader Model | no data | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.0 |
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 | 15
−20%
| 18−20
+20%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−20.7%
|
35−40
+20.7%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
−14.3%
|
24−27
+14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−23.1%
|
16−18
+23.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−20.7%
|
35−40
+20.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−23.1%
|
16−18
+23.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−20.7%
|
35−40
+20.7%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−14.3%
|
16−18
+14.3%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
This is how R3 (Mullins/Beema) and ATI E4690 compete in popular games:
- ATI E4690 is 20% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.77 | 0.97 |
| Recency | 29 April 2014 | 1 June 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 55 nm |
R3 (Mullins/Beema) has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 96% more advanced lithography process.
ATI E4690, on the other hand, has a 26% higher aggregate performance score.
The Radeon E4690 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R3 (Mullins/Beema) in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R3 (Mullins/Beema) is a notebook graphics card while Radeon E4690 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
