ATI Radeon HD 3850 vs UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) with Radeon HD 3850, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)
2021
15 Watt
13.88
+1261%

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) outperforms ATI HD 3850 by a whopping 1261% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3731100
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.02
Power efficiency64.500.95
Architectureno dataTeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameRocket Lake GT1RV670
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date30 March 2021 (3 years ago)19 November 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$179

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 coresno data320
Core clock speedno data668 MHz
Number of transistorsno data666 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data10.69
Floating-point processing powerno data0.4275 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data16

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data208 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin

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 typeno dataGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data1 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data830 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data53.12 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 Connectorsno data2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectXno data10.1 (10_1)
Shader Modelno data4.1
OpenGLno data3.3
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-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 HD110−1

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+1700%
2−3
−1700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+1600%
3−4
−1600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+1750%
2−3
−1750%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+1333%
3−4
−1333%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+1343%
7−8
−1343%
Hitman 3 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+1480%
5−6
−1480%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+1667%
3−4
−1667%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+1333%
3−4
−1333%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+1600%
3−4
−1600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+1500%
5−6
−1500%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+1700%
2−3
−1700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+1600%
3−4
−1600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+1750%
2−3
−1750%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+1333%
3−4
−1333%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+1343%
7−8
−1343%
Hitman 3 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+1480%
5−6
−1480%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+1667%
3−4
−1667%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+1333%
3−4
−1333%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+1750%
2−3
−1750%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+1500%
5−6
−1500%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+1700%
2−3
−1700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+1750%
2−3
−1750%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+1343%
7−8
−1343%
Hitman 3 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+1480%
5−6
−1480%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+1600%
3−4
−1600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+1750%
2−3
−1750%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+1500%
5−6
−1500%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+1333%
3−4
−1333%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 0−1
Far Cry 5 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+1283%
6−7
−1283%
Hitman 3 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+1300%
2−3
−1300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+1271%
7−8
−1271%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14 0−1
Hitman 3 10−12 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+1480%
5−6
−1480%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 8−9 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.88 1.02
Recency 30 March 2021 19 November 2007
Chip lithography 14 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 75 Watt

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) has a 1260.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 3850 in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is a notebook card while Radeon HD 3850 is a desktop one.


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.


Intel UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)
UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)
ATI Radeon HD 3850
Radeon HD 3850

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.


3.8 110 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 205 votes

Rate Radeon HD 3850 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.