ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5830 vs GeForce 9800M GTS SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 9800M GTS SLI and Mobility Radeon HD 5830, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
9800M GTS SLI outperforms ATI Mobility HD 5830 by a considerable 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 946 | 1060 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 0.90 | 3.96 |
| Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | NB9E-GT | Broadway |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 July 2008 (17 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 cores | 128 | 800 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1508 Million | 1,040 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 24 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 20.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.8 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 16 |
| TMUs | no data | 40 |
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 size | large | large |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| 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 type | GDDR3 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | N/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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Fortnite | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+12.1%
|
30−35
−12.1%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
+31%
|
27−30
−31%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
+23.5%
|
16−18
−23.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Fortnite | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+12.1%
|
30−35
−12.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
+23.5%
|
16−18
−23.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+12.1%
|
30−35
−12.1%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
+50%
|
8−9
−50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+38.5%
|
12−14
−38.5%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
+200%
|
4−5
−200%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the 9800M GTS SLI is 300% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- 9800M GTS SLI is ahead in 42 tests (98%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (2%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.73 | 1.22 |
| Recency | 15 July 2008 | 7 January 2010 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 1 GB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 24 Watt |
9800M GTS SLI has a 41.8% higher aggregate performance score.
ATI Mobility HD 5830, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 37.5% more advanced lithography process, and 525% lower power consumption.
The GeForce 9800M GTS SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 5830 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.
