ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5730 vs GeForce 840M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 840M and Mobility Radeon HD 5730, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce 840M
2014
4 GB DDR3, 33 Watt
2.85
+93.9%

840M outperforms ATI Mobility HD 5730 by an impressive 94% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking796987
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.963.90
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGM108Madison
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date12 March 2014 (10 years ago)7 January 2010 (15 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 cores384400
Core clock speed1029 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speed1124 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data627 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt26 Watt
Texture fill rate17.9813.00
Floating-point processing power0.8632 TFLOPS0.52 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs1620

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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1001 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth16.02 GB/s25.6 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 outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boost2.0no data
Optimus+-
GameWorks+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.54.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce 840M 2.85
+93.9%
ATI Mobility HD 5730 1.47

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.

GeForce 840M 7191
+88.8%
ATI Mobility HD 5730 3809

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:

900p45
+221%
14
−221%
Full HD18
+5.9%
17
−5.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Elden Ring 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Valorant 0−1 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Dota 2 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Elden Ring 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
Fortnite 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%
Valorant 0−1 0−1
World of Tanks 46
+48.4%
30−35
−48.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Dota 2 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Valorant 0−1 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 0−1 0−1
Elden Ring 2−3 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+122%
9−10
−122%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1
World of Tanks 18−20
+111%
9−10
−111%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Valorant 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Fortnite 1−2 0−1
Valorant 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

This is how GeForce 840M and ATI Mobility HD 5730 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce 840M is 221% faster in 900p
  • GeForce 840M is 6% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Elden Ring, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the GeForce 840M is 400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GeForce 840M is ahead in 38 tests (86%)
  • there's a draw in 6 tests (14%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.85 1.47
Recency 12 March 2014 7 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 26 Watt

GeForce 840M has a 93.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

ATI Mobility HD 5730, on the other hand, has 26.9% lower power consumption.

The GeForce 840M is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 5730 in performance tests.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce 840M
GeForce 840M
ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5730
Mobility Radeon HD 5730

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.


3.4 948 votes

Rate GeForce 840M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 14 votes

Rate Mobility Radeon HD 5730 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.