ATI Radeon HD 4650 AGP vs GeForce 930M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 930M with Radeon HD 4650 AGP, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 930M
2015
2 GB DDR3, 33 Watt
2.62
+385%

930M outperforms ATI HD 4650 AGP by a whopping 385% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8131223
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.540.78
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGM108RV730
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date13 March 2015 (9 years ago)10 September 2008 (16 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 cores384320
Core clock speed549 MHz600 MHz
Boost clock speed549 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data514 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt48 Watt
Texture fill rate13.1819.20
Floating-point processing power0.4216 TFLOPS0.384 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs2432

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 supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8AGP 8x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDR3DDR2
Maximum RAM amount2 GB512 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/s12.8 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+

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)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.7 (5.1)4.1
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL3.01.1
Vulkan1.3N/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 930M 2.62
+385%
ATI HD 4650 AGP 0.54

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.

GeForce 930M 1012
+389%
ATI HD 4650 AGP 207

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 HD18
+500%
3−4
−500%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Hitman 3 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+425%
4−5
−425%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 13
+550%
2−3
−550%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+443%
7−8
−443%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Hitman 3 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+425%
4−5
−425%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24
+500%
4−5
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+443%
7−8
−443%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Hitman 3 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+425%
4−5
−425%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+600%
1−2
−600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+443%
7−8
−443%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Hitman 3 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1

This is how GeForce 930M and ATI HD 4650 AGP compete in popular games:

  • GeForce 930M is 500% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.62 0.54
Recency 13 March 2015 10 September 2008
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 48 Watt

GeForce 930M has a 385.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 45.5% lower power consumption.

The GeForce 930M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4650 AGP in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 930M is a notebook card while Radeon HD 4650 AGP 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.


NVIDIA GeForce 930M
GeForce 930M
ATI Radeon HD 4650 AGP
Radeon HD 4650 AGP

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.


3.1 261 vote

Rate GeForce 930M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 18 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4650 AGP 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.