ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3670 vs GeForce GTX 480
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 480 with Mobility Radeon HD 3670, including specs and performance data.
GTX 480 outperforms Mobility HD 3670 by a whopping 2205% 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 | 489 | 1311 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.35 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 2.98 | 1.08 |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | TeraScale (2005−2013) |
| GPU code name | GF100 | M86 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 26 March 2010 (15 years ago) | 7 January 2008 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $499 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 480 | 120 |
| Core clock speed | 700 MHz | 680 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,100 million | 378 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 30 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 42.06 | 5.440 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.345 TFLOPS | 0.1632 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 48 | 4 |
| TMUs | 60 | 8 |
| L1 Cache | 960 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB | 128 KB |
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 | no data | medium sized |
| Bus support | 16x PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | no data |
| 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 | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1536 MB | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1848 MHz (3696 data rate) | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 177.4 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | Two Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMI | No outputs |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| HDCP | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 10.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.2 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | - |
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
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+2550%
|
2−3
−2550%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 18−20
+260%
|
5−6
−260%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+4300%
|
1−2
−4300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+2550%
|
2−3
−2550%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+3100%
|
1−2
−3100%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+2850%
|
2−3
−2850%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+975%
|
4−5
−975%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−33
+2900%
|
1−2
−2900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 18−20
+260%
|
5−6
−260%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+414%
|
7−8
−414%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+248%
|
27−30
−248%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+4300%
|
1−2
−4300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+2550%
|
2−3
−2550%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 140−150
+887%
|
14−16
−887%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| Dota 2 | 70−75
+610%
|
10−11
−610%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+3100%
|
1−2
−3100%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+2850%
|
2−3
−2850%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+975%
|
4−5
−975%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−33
+2900%
|
1−2
−2900%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35−40
+3600%
|
1−2
−3600%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 18−20
+260%
|
5−6
−260%
|
| Metro Exodus | 20−22 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+414%
|
7−8
−414%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+420%
|
5−6
−420%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+248%
|
27−30
−248%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+4300%
|
1−2
−4300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| Dota 2 | 70−75
+610%
|
10−11
−610%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+3100%
|
1−2
−3100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+975%
|
4−5
−975%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 18−20
+260%
|
5−6
−260%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+414%
|
7−8
−414%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+420%
|
5−6
−420%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+248%
|
27−30
−248%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 55−60
+2850%
|
2−3
−2850%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+500%
|
3−4
−500%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 75−80
+7400%
|
1−2
−7400%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 50−55
+1200%
|
4−5
−1200%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+2625%
|
4−5
−2625%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+2400%
|
1−2
−2400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+1050%
|
2−3
−1050%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 21−24 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+50%
|
14−16
−50%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 50−55
+2500%
|
2−3
−2500%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+3500%
|
1−2
−3500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 480 is 7400% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GTX 480 surpassed ATI Mobility HD 3670 in all 31 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.22 | 0.40 |
| Recency | 26 March 2010 | 7 January 2008 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1536 MB | 256 MB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 30 Watt |
GTX 480 has a 2205% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.
ATI Mobility HD 3670, on the other hand, has 733.3% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 480 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 3670 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 480 is a desktop graphics card while Mobility Radeon HD 3670 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
