GRID K260Q vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3850

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 3850 with GRID K260Q, including specs and performance data.

ATI Mobility HD 3850
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 35 Watt
0.68

K260Q outperforms Mobility HD 3850 by a whopping 937% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1237595
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.40
Power efficiency1.502.41
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameM88GK104
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date4 June 2008 (17 years ago)28 June 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$937

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 cores3201536
Core clock speed580 MHz745 MHz
Number of transistors666 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate9.28095.36
Floating-point processing power0.3712 TFLOPS2.289 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs16128
L1 Cacheno data128 KB
L2 Cache256 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 sizelargeno 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 amount512 MB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed750 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth48 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 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−900%
80−85
+900%
Valorant 27−30
−934%
300−310
+934%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 20−22
−900%
200−210
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
Dota 2 12−14
−900%
120−130
+900%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−900%
80−85
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Valorant 27−30
−934%
300−310
+934%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
Dota 2 12−14
−900%
120−130
+900%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−900%
80−85
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Valorant 27−30
−934%
300−310
+934%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−900%
70−75
+900%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−900%
140−150
+900%
Valorant 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.68 7.05
Recency 4 June 2008 28 June 2013
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 225 Watt

ATI Mobility HD 3850 has 543% lower power consumption.

GRID K260Q, on the other hand, has a 937% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 96% more advanced lithography process.

The GRID K260Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 3850 in performance tests.

Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 3850 is a notebook graphics card while GRID K260Q is a workstation one.

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.


1 1 vote

Rate Mobility Radeon HD 3850 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate GRID K260Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Mobility Radeon HD 3850 or GRID K260Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.