ATI Radeon HD 4850 vs R9 390X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 390X and Radeon HD 4850, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 390X
2015, $429
0 MB GDDR5, 275 Watt
22.06
+797%

R9 390X outperforms HD 4850 by a whopping 797% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking293895
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.560.23
Power efficiency6.211.73
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGrenadaRV770
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date18 June 2015 (11 years ago)25 June 2008 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$429 $199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

R9 390X has 3622% better value for money than ATI HD 4850.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores2816800
Core clock speedno data625 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,200 million956 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt110 Watt
Texture fill rate184.825.00
Floating-point processing power5.914 TFLOPS1 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs17640
L1 Cache704 KB160 KB
L2 Cache1024 KB256 KB

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length275 mm246 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pin1x 6-pin
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount0 MB512 MB
Memory bus width512 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1050 MHz993 MHz
Memory bandwidth384 GB/s63.55 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x S-Video
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1210.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.34.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan+N/A
Mantle+-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R9 390X 22.06
+797%
ATI HD 4850 2.46

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.

R9 390X 9189
+796%
Samples: 1401
ATI HD 4850 1026
Samples: 2825

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

R9 390X 35807
+299%
ATI HD 4850 8972

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

R9 390X 74351
+560%
ATI HD 4850 11272

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

R9 390X 318024
+336%
ATI HD 4850 72891

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:

900p250−260
+793%
28
−793%
Full HD91
+128%
40
−128%
1200p170−180
+795%
19
−795%
4K48
+860%
5−6
−860%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.71
+5.5%
4.98
−5.5%
4K8.94
+345%
39.80
−345%
  • R9 390X has 6% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • R9 390X has 345% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 60−65
+917%
6−7
−917%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+1700%
7−8
−1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+880%
5−6
−880%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 60−65
+917%
6−7
−917%
Battlefield 5 90−95
+1025%
8−9
−1025%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+1700%
7−8
−1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+880%
5−6
−880%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+1117%
6−7
−1117%
Fortnite 110−120
+842%
12−14
−842%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+650%
12−14
−650%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+1083%
6−7
−1083%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+625%
12−14
−625%
Valorant 150−160
+267%
40−45
−267%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 60−65
+917%
6−7
−917%
Battlefield 5 90−95
+1025%
8−9
−1025%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+1700%
7−8
−1700%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+421%
45−50
−421%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+880%
5−6
−880%
Dota 2 110−120
+372%
24−27
−372%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+1117%
6−7
−1117%
Fortnite 110−120
+842%
12−14
−842%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+650%
12−14
−650%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+1083%
6−7
−1083%
Grand Theft Auto V 80−85
+1540%
5−6
−1540%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+1125%
4−5
−1125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+625%
12−14
−625%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 76
+744%
9−10
−744%
Valorant 150−160
+267%
40−45
−267%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95
+1025%
8−9
−1025%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+880%
5−6
−880%
Dota 2 110−120
+372%
24−27
−372%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+1117%
6−7
−1117%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+650%
12−14
−650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+625%
12−14
−625%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 41
+356%
9−10
−356%
Valorant 150−160
+267%
40−45
−267%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
+842%
12−14
−842%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+840%
5−6
−840%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+789%
18−20
−789%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+925%
4−5
−925%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+657%
21−24
−657%
Valorant 180−190
+736%
21−24
−736%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65
+800%
7−8
−800%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+1600%
3−4
−1600%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+850%
6−7
−850%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+1067%
3−4
−1067%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
+1225%
4−5
−1225%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+1000%
2−3
−1000%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+173%
14−16
−173%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+867%
3−4
−867%
Valorant 120−130
+925%
12−14
−925%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+1067%
3−4
−1067%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+1000%
2−3
−1000%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Dota 2 75−80
+1150%
6−7
−1150%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+667%
3−4
−667%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+700%
3−4
−700%

This is how R9 390X and ATI HD 4850 compete in popular games:

  • R9 390X is 793% faster in 900p
  • R9 390X is 128% faster in 1080p
  • R9 390X is 795% faster in 1200p
  • R9 390X is 860% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 390X is 3800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, R9 390X surpassed ATI HD 4850 in all 54 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 22.06 2.46
Recency 18 June 2015 25 June 2008
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 110 Watt

R9 390X has a 797% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 96% more advanced lithography process.

ATI HD 4850, on the other hand, has 150% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 390X is our recommended choice as it beats the 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.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.3 298 votes

Rate Radeon R9 390X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 309 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4850 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 390X or Radeon HD 4850, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.