ATI Radeon HD 4810 vs GeForce MX150
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce MX150 with Radeon HD 4810, including specs and performance data.
MX150 outperforms ATI HD 4810 by a whopping 191% 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 | 645 | 938 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 40.96 | 1.48 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | TeraScale (2005−2013) |
| GPU code name | GP108 | RV770 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 17 May 2017 (8 years ago) | 28 May 2009 (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 cores | 384 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 937 MHz | 625 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1038 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,800 million | 956 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 95 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 24.91 | 20.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.7972 TFLOPS | 0.8 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 8 |
| TMUs | 24 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 144 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 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 | large | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 246 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1253 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 40.1 GB/s | 57.6 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 | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 10.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | 6.1 | - |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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 HD | 27
+200%
| 9−10
−200%
|
| 1440p | 30
+200%
| 10−12
−200%
|
| 4K | 18
+200%
| 6−7
−200%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+213%
|
8−9
−213%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+267%
|
3−4
−267%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−12
+267%
|
3−4
−267%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 39
+225%
|
12−14
−225%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+213%
|
8−9
−213%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 11
+267%
|
3−4
−267%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 17
+240%
|
5−6
−240%
|
| Fortnite | 59
+228%
|
18−20
−228%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 25
+213%
|
8−9
−213%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 14−16
+200%
|
5−6
−200%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−12
+267%
|
3−4
−267%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 26
+225%
|
8−9
−225%
|
| Valorant | 100
+233%
|
30−33
−233%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 32
+220%
|
10−11
−220%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+213%
|
8−9
−213%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 87
+222%
|
27−30
−222%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| Dota 2 | 68
+224%
|
21−24
−224%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 16
+220%
|
5−6
−220%
|
| Fortnite | 34
+240%
|
10−11
−240%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21
+200%
|
7−8
−200%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 14−16
+200%
|
5−6
−200%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 26
+225%
|
8−9
−225%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−12
+267%
|
3−4
−267%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 22
+214%
|
7−8
−214%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 19
+217%
|
6−7
−217%
|
| Valorant | 100
+233%
|
30−33
−233%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 26
+225%
|
8−9
−225%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+267%
|
3−4
−267%
|
| Dota 2 | 62
+195%
|
21−24
−195%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14
+250%
|
4−5
−250%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14
+250%
|
4−5
−250%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−12
+267%
|
3−4
−267%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 15
+200%
|
5−6
−200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 11
+267%
|
3−4
−267%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
+210%
|
21−24
−210%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 24
+200%
|
8−9
−200%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+267%
|
3−4
−267%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 55
+206%
|
18−20
−206%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 43
+207%
|
14−16
−207%
|
| Valorant | 66
+214%
|
21−24
−214%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+267%
|
3−4
−267%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+225%
|
4−5
−225%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 10−12
+267%
|
3−4
−267%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30
+200%
|
10−11
−200%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+240%
|
5−6
−240%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 33
+230%
|
10−11
−230%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 24
+200%
|
8−9
−200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
This is how GeForce MX150 and ATI HD 4810 compete in popular games:
- GeForce MX150 is 200% faster in 1080p
- GeForce MX150 is 200% faster in 1440p
- GeForce MX150 is 200% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 5.09 | 1.75 |
| Recency | 17 May 2017 | 28 May 2009 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 95 Watt |
GeForce MX150 has a 190.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 850% lower power consumption.
The GeForce MX150 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4810 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce MX150 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon HD 4810 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
