ATI Radeon HD 4850 vs GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB and Radeon HD 4850, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1060 3 GB
2016
3 GB GDDR5, 120 Watt
24.94
+834%

GTX 1060 3 GB outperforms ATI HD 4850 by a whopping 834% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking221814
Place by popularity23not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation22.680.26
Power efficiency14.331.67
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGP106RV770
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date18 August 2016 (8 years ago)25 June 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1060 3 GB has 8623% better value for money than ATI HD 4850.

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 cores1152800
Core clock speed1506 MHz625 MHz
Boost clock speed1708 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,400 million956 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt110 Watt
Texture fill rate123.025.00
Floating-point processing power3.935 TFLOPS1 TFLOPS
ROPs4816
TMUs7240

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 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length250 mm246 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1x 6-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount3 GB512 MB
Memory bus width192 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed2002 MHz993 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.2 GB/s63.55 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.44.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA6.1-

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.

GTX 1060 3 GB 24.94
+834%
ATI HD 4850 2.67

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.

GTX 1060 3 GB 9588
+835%
ATI HD 4850 1026

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:

900p270−280
+831%
29
−831%
Full HD350−400
+797%
39
−797%
1200p170−180
+795%
19
−795%

Cost per frame, $

1080p0.57
+797%
5.10
−797%
  • GTX 1060 3 GB has 797% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
World of Tanks 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
World of Tanks 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

This is how GTX 1060 3 GB and ATI HD 4850 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1060 3 GB is 831% faster in 900p
  • GTX 1060 3 GB is 797% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1060 3 GB is 795% faster in 1200p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.94 2.67
Recency 18 August 2016 25 June 2008
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 16 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 110 Watt

GTX 1060 3 GB has a 834.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 243.8% more advanced lithography process.

ATI HD 4850, on the other hand, has 9.1% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4850 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 GTX 1060 3 GB
GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB
ATI Radeon HD 4850
Radeon HD 4850

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.


4.1 9024 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 267 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4850 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.