ATI Radeon X800 PRO vs ATI Mobility HD 3850
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 3850 with Radeon X800 PRO, including specs and performance data.
Mobility HD 3850 outperforms X800 PRO by a whopping 353% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1237 | 1489 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.50 | 0.24 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | R400 (2004−2008) |
| GPU code name | M88 | R423 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 4 June 2008 (17 years ago) | 1 May 2004 (22 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 cores | 320 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 580 MHz | 475 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 666 million | 160 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 48 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 9.280 | 5.700 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.3712 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 12 |
| TMUs | 16 | 12 |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | no data |
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 |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x Molex |
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 | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 750 MHz | 450 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 48 GB/s | 28.8 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 Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 9.0b (9_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 2.0 |
| OpenCL | N/A | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/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 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+383%
|
6−7
−383%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 20−22
+400%
|
4−5
−400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+500%
|
2−3
−500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+383%
|
6−7
−383%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+500%
|
2−3
−500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+383%
|
6−7
−383%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+367%
|
3−4
−367%
|
| Valorant | 3−4 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.68 | 0.15 |
| Recency | 4 June 2008 | 1 May 2004 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 256 MB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 48 Watt |
ATI Mobility HD 3850 has a 353% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 136% more advanced lithography process, and 37% lower power consumption.
The Mobility Radeon HD 3850 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X800 PRO in performance tests.
Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 3850 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon X800 PRO 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.
