GRID K240Q vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3670

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 3670 with GRID K240Q, including specs and performance data.

ATI Mobility HD 3670
2008
256 MB GDDR3, 30 Watt
0.48

K240Q outperforms Mobility HD 3670 by a whopping 1167% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1304634
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.59
Power efficiency1.232.08
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameM86GK104
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date7 January 2008 (18 years ago)28 June 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$469

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores1201536
Core clock speed680 MHz745 MHz
Number of transistors378 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate5.44095.36
Floating-point processing power0.1632 TFLOPS2.289 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs8128
L1 Cacheno data128 KB
L2 Cache128 KB512 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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount256 MB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s160.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX10.1 (10_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.15.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA-3.0

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

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1100%
12−14
+1100%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−1100%
60−65
+1100%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1100%
12−14
+1100%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−1150%
50−55
+1150%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−1100%
60−65
+1100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−1150%
100−105
+1150%
Valorant 27−30
−1011%
300−310
+1011%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
−1135%
210−220
+1135%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1100%
12−14
+1100%
Dota 2 10−12
−1082%
130−140
+1082%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−1150%
50−55
+1150%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−1100%
60−65
+1100%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−1150%
100−105
+1150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−1100%
60−65
+1100%
Valorant 27−30
−1011%
300−310
+1011%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1100%
12−14
+1100%
Dota 2 10−12
−1082%
130−140
+1082%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−1150%
50−55
+1150%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−1100%
60−65
+1100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−1150%
100−105
+1150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−1100%
60−65
+1100%
Valorant 27−30
−1011%
300−310
+1011%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−1067%
35−40
+1067%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3
−1100%
24−27
+1100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
−1100%
60−65
+1100%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−1100%
24−27
+1100%
Hogwarts Legacy 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−1100%
12−14
+1100%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−1114%
170−180
+1114%
Valorant 2−3
−1100%
24−27
+1100%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−1100%
24−27
+1100%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−1100%
24−27
+1100%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.48 6.08
Recency 7 January 2008 28 June 2013
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 225 Watt

ATI Mobility HD 3670 has 650% lower power consumption.

GRID K240Q, on the other hand, has a 1166.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.

The GRID K240Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 3670 in performance tests.

Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 3670 is a notebook graphics card while GRID K240Q is a workstation one.

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.


ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3670
Mobility Radeon HD 3670
NVIDIA GRID K240Q
GRID K240Q

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.


2.3 21 votes

Rate Mobility Radeon HD 3670 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate GRID K240Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Mobility Radeon HD 3670 or GRID K240Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.