GeForce 9800 GTX vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3850
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 3850 with GeForce 9800 GTX, including specs and performance data.
9800 GTX outperforms ATI Mobility HD 3850 by a whopping 186% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1183 | 904 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.10 |
| Power efficiency | 1.37 | 0.98 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | M88 | G92 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 4 June 2008 (16 years ago) | 28 March 2008 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $299 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 | 320 | 128 |
| Core clock speed | 580 MHz | 675 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 666 million | 754 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 140 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Texture fill rate | 9.280 | 43.20 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.3712 TFLOPS | 0.4321 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 16 | 64 |
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 |
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Height | no data | 4.376" (11.1 cm) |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 2x 6-pin |
| 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 | GDDR3 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 750 MHz | 1100 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 48 GB/s | 70.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 Connectors | No outputs | HDTVDual Link DVI |
| Multi monitor support | no data | + |
| HDMI | - | Via Adapter |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | S/PDIF |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 1.1 |
| 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 Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−186%
|
20−22
+186%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−186%
|
20−22
+186%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−150%
|
10−11
+150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−163%
|
21−24
+163%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−176%
|
80−85
+176%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−186%
|
20−22
+186%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 18−20
−163%
|
50−55
+163%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−150%
|
30−33
+150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−150%
|
10−11
+150%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−163%
|
21−24
+163%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−180%
|
14−16
+180%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−176%
|
80−85
+176%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−186%
|
20−22
+186%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−150%
|
30−33
+150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−150%
|
10−11
+150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−163%
|
21−24
+163%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−180%
|
14−16
+180%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−176%
|
80−85
+176%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−150%
|
10−11
+150%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−167%
|
40−45
+167%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−150%
|
10−11
+150%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.70 | 2.00 |
| Recency | 4 June 2008 | 28 March 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 140 Watt |
ATI Mobility HD 3850 has an age advantage of 2 months, a 18.2% more advanced lithography process, and 300% lower power consumption.
9800 GTX, on the other hand, has a 185.7% higher aggregate performance score.
The GeForce 9800 GTX 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 card while GeForce 9800 GTX 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.
