ATI Radeon HD 4670 vs GeForce GT 230M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 230M with Radeon HD 4670, including specs and performance data.

GT 230M
2009
Up to 1 GB GDDR3, 23 Watt
0.55

ATI HD 4670 outperforms GT 230M by an impressive 78% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12171110
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiency1.641.14
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGT216RV730
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date15 June 2009 (15 years ago)10 September 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$67

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 cores48320
Core clock speed500 MHz750 MHz
Number of transistors486 million514 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt59 Watt
Texture fill rate8.00024.00
Floating-point processing power0.1056 TFLOPS0.48 TFLOPS
Gigaflops158no data
ROPs88
TMUs1632

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 sizedno data
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data193 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amountUp to 1 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 600 (DDR2), Up to 800 (GDDR3), Up to 1066 (GDDR3) MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth16 (DDR2), 25 (DDR3)32 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVIVGADisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVI2x DVI, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIHDAno data

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.14.1
OpenGL2.13.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/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.

GT 230M 0.55
ATI HD 4670 0.98
+78.2%

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.

GT 230M 212
ATI HD 4670 379
+78.8%

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

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−63.6%
18−20
+63.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−66.7%
50−55
+66.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−63.6%
18−20
+63.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−60%
16−18
+60%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−66.7%
50−55
+66.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Hitman 3 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−63.6%
18−20
+63.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−60%
16−18
+60%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−66.7%
50−55
+66.7%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.55 0.98
Recency 15 June 2009 10 September 2008
Chip lithography 40 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 59 Watt

GT 230M has an age advantage of 9 months, a 37.5% more advanced lithography process, and 156.5% lower power consumption.

ATI HD 4670, on the other hand, has a 78.2% higher aggregate performance score.

The Radeon HD 4670 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 230M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 230M is a notebook card while Radeon HD 4670 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 GT 230M
GeForce GT 230M
ATI Radeon HD 4670
Radeon HD 4670

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.


3.4 25 votes

Rate GeForce GT 230M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 149 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4670 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.