GeForce GT 415M vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3850

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 3850 and GeForce GT 415M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI Mobility HD 3850
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 35 Watt
0.69

GT 415M outperforms ATI Mobility HD 3850 by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11831170
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.374.28
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameM88GF108
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date4 June 2008 (16 years ago)3 September 2010 (14 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 cores32048
Core clock speed580 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors666 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt12 Watt
Texture fill rate9.2804.000
Floating-point processing power0.3712 TFLOPS0.096 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs168

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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16

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 typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed750 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth48 GB/s25.6 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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/A1.1
VulkanN/AN/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
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
−5.3%
20−22
+5.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 415M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 415M is ahead in 7 tests (20%)
  • there's a draw in 28 tests (80%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.69 0.74
Recency 4 June 2008 3 September 2010
Chip lithography 55 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 12 Watt

GT 415M has a 7.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 37.5% more advanced lithography process, and 191.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Mobility Radeon HD 3850 and GeForce GT 415M.

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 3850
Mobility Radeon HD 3850
NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M
GeForce GT 415M

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
2.7 26 votes

Rate GeForce GT 415M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Mobility Radeon HD 3850 or GeForce GT 415M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.