ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT vs ATI Mobility HD 3850

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 3850 with Radeon HD 2900 XT, including specs and performance data.

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

HD 2900 XT outperforms Mobility HD 3850 by a whopping 132% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12371002
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.05
Power efficiency1.500.57
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameM88R600
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date4 June 2008 (17 years ago)14 May 2007 (19 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$399

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 cores320320
Core clock speed580 MHz743 MHz
Number of transistors666 million720 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt215 Watt
Texture fill rate9.28011.89
Floating-point processing power0.3712 TFLOPS0.4755 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs1616
L2 Cache256 KB256 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 1.0 x16
Lengthno data241 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 typeGDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit512 Bit
Memory clock speed750 MHz828 MHz
Memory bandwidth48 GB/s106.0 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 outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API and SDK support

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

DirectX10.1 (10_1)10.0 (10_0)
Shader Model4.14.0
OpenGL3.33.3 (full) 4.0 (partial)
OpenCLN/AN/A
VulkanN/AN/A

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
−100%
4−5
+100%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Valorant 27−30
−124%
65−70
+124%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 20−22
−125%
45−50
+125%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Dota 2 12−14
−125%
27−30
+125%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%
Valorant 27−30
−124%
65−70
+124%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Dota 2 12−14
−125%
27−30
+125%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%
Valorant 27−30
−124%
65−70
+124%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%
Valorant 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.68 1.58
Recency 4 June 2008 14 May 2007
Chip lithography 55 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 215 Watt

ATI Mobility HD 3850 has an age advantage of 1 year, a 45% more advanced lithography process, and 514% lower power consumption.

ATI HD 2900 XT, on the other hand, has a 132% higher aggregate performance score.

The Radeon HD 2900 XT 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 Radeon HD 2900 XT 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.

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
3.5 73 votes

Rate Radeon HD 2900 XT 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 Radeon HD 2900 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.