ATI Radeon HD 4770 vs UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) with Radeon HD 4770, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)
2021
15 Watt
14.09
+502%

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) outperforms ATI HD 4770 by a whopping 502% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking380861
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.36
Power efficiency64.402.01
Architectureno dataTeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameRocket Lake GT1RV740
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date30 March 2021 (3 years ago)28 April 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$109

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 data640
Core clock speedno data750 MHz
Number of transistorsno data826 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rateno data24.00
Floating-point processing powerno data0.96 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32

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 data203 mm
Widthno data2-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 dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data512 MB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data51.2 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 and SDK 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 data1.1
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 HD13
+550%
2−3
−550%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data54.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 30−35
+560%
5−6
−560%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+700%
3−4
−700%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+575%
4−5
−575%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 30−35
+560%
5−6
−560%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+533%
9−10
−533%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+700%
3−4
−700%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+575%
4−5
−575%
Far Cry 5 9
+800%
1−2
−800%
Fortnite 75−80
+533%
12−14
−533%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+522%
9−10
−522%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+600%
5−6
−600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+586%
7−8
−586%
Valorant 110−120
+528%
18−20
−528%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 30−35
+560%
5−6
−560%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+533%
9−10
−533%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+700%
3−4
−700%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190
+510%
30−33
−510%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+575%
4−5
−575%
Dota 2 27
+575%
4−5
−575%
Far Cry 5 8
+700%
1−2
−700%
Fortnite 75−80
+533%
12−14
−533%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+522%
9−10
−522%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+600%
5−6
−600%
Grand Theft Auto V 6 0−1
Metro Exodus 7
+600%
1−2
−600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+586%
7−8
−586%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+600%
5−6
−600%
Valorant 110−120
+528%
18−20
−528%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+533%
9−10
−533%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+700%
3−4
−700%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+575%
4−5
−575%
Dota 2 25
+525%
4−5
−525%
Far Cry 5 8
+700%
1−2
−700%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+522%
9−10
−522%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+600%
5−6
−600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+586%
7−8
−586%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+600%
5−6
−600%
Valorant 110−120
+528%
18−20
−528%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+533%
12−14
−533%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 95−100
+519%
16−18
−519%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+528%
18−20
−528%
Valorant 130−140
+562%
21−24
−562%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+620%
5−6
−620%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+625%
4−5
−625%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+540%
5−6
−540%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+700%
3−4
−700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 27−30
+625%
4−5
−625%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+525%
4−5
−525%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%
Valorant 70−75
+610%
10−11
−610%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+800%
2−3
−800%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 0−1
Dota 2 45−50
+586%
7−8
−586%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+667%
3−4
−667%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%

This is how UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) and ATI HD 4770 compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is 550% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.09 2.34
Recency 30 March 2021 28 April 2009
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 80 Watt

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) has a 502.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 433.3% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4770 in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is a notebook card while Radeon HD 4770 is a desktop one.

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 4770
Radeon HD 4770

Other comparisons

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.


3.8 115 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 74 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4770 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) or Radeon HD 4770, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.