ATI Radeon HD 4750 vs GeForce 8800 Ultra

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking936not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency0.67no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameG80RV740
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date2 May 2007 (17 years ago)9 September 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$829 no data

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 cores612640
Core clock speed612 MHz730 MHz
Number of transistors681 million826 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)171 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate39.1723.36
Floating-point processing power0.3871 TFLOPS0.9344 TFLOPS
ROPs2416
TMUs3232

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length270 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin1x 6-pin
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB512 MB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1080 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth103.7 GB/s51.2 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Video2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.04.1
OpenGL3.33.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 2 May 2007 9 September 2009
Chip lithography 90 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 171 Watt 100 Watt

ATI HD 4750 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 125% more advanced lithography process, and 71% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 8800 Ultra and Radeon HD 4750. We've got no test results to judge.


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 8800 Ultra
GeForce 8800 Ultra
ATI Radeon HD 4750
Radeon HD 4750

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.


4.2 29 votes

Rate GeForce 8800 Ultra on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 56 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4750 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.