ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4850 vs R9 M275
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R9 M275 and Mobility Radeon HD 4850, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
R9 M275 outperforms ATI Mobility HD 4850 by an impressive 75% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 803 | 964 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.16 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2011−2020) | TeraScale (2005−2013) |
| GPU code name | Venus | M98 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 28 January 2014 (11 years ago) | 9 January 2009 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $799.99 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 | 640 | 800 |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 500 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 925 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,500 million | 956 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 37.00 | 20.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.184 TFLOPS | 0.8 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 40 | 40 |
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 size | large | large |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 64 GB/s | 54.4 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 | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 10.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
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 | 24
−70.8%
| 41
+70.8%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 33.33 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
- Full HD
Low Preset - Full HD
Medium Preset - Full HD
High Preset - Full HD
Ultra Preset - Full HD
Epic Preset - 1440p
High Preset - 1440p
Ultra Preset - 1440p
Epic Preset - 4K
High Preset - 4K
Ultra Preset - 4K
Epic Preset
| Atomic Heart | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Atomic Heart | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 14−16
+180%
|
5−6
−180%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+62.5%
|
8−9
−62.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+30%
|
10−11
−30%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+25%
|
35−40
−25%
|
| Atomic Heart | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 50−55
+54.5%
|
30−35
−54.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 27−30
+42.1%
|
18−20
−42.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 14−16
+180%
|
5−6
−180%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+62.5%
|
8−9
−62.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+30%
|
10−11
−30%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
+50%
|
6−7
−50%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+25%
|
35−40
−25%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 27−30
+42.1%
|
18−20
−42.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+62.5%
|
8−9
−62.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+30%
|
10−11
−30%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
+50%
|
6−7
−50%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+25%
|
35−40
−25%
|
| Fortnite | 14−16
+180%
|
5−6
−180%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 20−22
+100%
|
10−11
−100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
+60%
|
14−16
−60%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+178%
|
9−10
−178%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Fortnite | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
+75%
|
8−9
−75%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
This is how R9 M275 and ATI Mobility HD 4850 compete in popular games:
- ATI Mobility HD 4850 is 71% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 M275 is 250% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- R9 M275 is ahead in 43 tests (96%)
- there's a draw in 2 tests (4%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.49 | 1.42 |
| Recency | 28 January 2014 | 9 January 2009 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 55 nm |
R9 M275 has a 75.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon R9 M275 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 4850 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
