GeForce RTX 4050 vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3870
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 3870 with GeForce RTX 4050, including specs and performance data.
RTX 4050 outperforms ATI Mobility HD 3870 by a whopping 2628% 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 | 1051 | 152 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 44 |
| Power efficiency | 1.71 | 25.66 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) |
| GPU code name | M88 | AD107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 4 June 2008 (16 years ago) | 2023 (2 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 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 660 MHz | 2505 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2640 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 666 million | 18,900 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 10.56 | 211.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.4224 TFLOPS | 13.52 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 32 |
| TMUs | 16 | 80 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 120 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 18 |
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 4.0 x8 |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 12-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 type | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 96 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 850 MHz | 2250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 54.4 GB/s | 216.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| CUDA | - | 8.9 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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
| Baldur's Gate 3 | 5−6
−2500%
|
130−140
+2500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−2567%
|
80−85
+2567%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Baldur's Gate 3 | 5−6
−2500%
|
130−140
+2500%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−2567%
|
80−85
+2567%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−2567%
|
80−85
+2567%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−2614%
|
190−200
+2614%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−2567%
|
240−250
+2567%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−2547%
|
900−950
+2547%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Baldur's Gate 3 | 5−6
−2500%
|
130−140
+2500%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 27−30
−2486%
|
750−800
+2486%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−2567%
|
80−85
+2567%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−2547%
|
450−500
+2547%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−2567%
|
80−85
+2567%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−2614%
|
190−200
+2614%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−2567%
|
240−250
+2567%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−2614%
|
190−200
+2614%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−2547%
|
900−950
+2547%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Baldur's Gate 3 | 5−6
−2500%
|
130−140
+2500%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−2567%
|
80−85
+2567%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−2547%
|
450−500
+2547%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−2614%
|
190−200
+2614%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−2567%
|
240−250
+2567%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−2614%
|
190−200
+2614%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−2547%
|
900−950
+2547%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−2567%
|
80−85
+2567%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 8−9
−2525%
|
210−220
+2525%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−2525%
|
210−220
+2525%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−2500%
|
130−140
+2500%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−2567%
|
80−85
+2567%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−2400%
|
400−450
+2400%
|
| Valorant | 7−8
−2614%
|
190−200
+2614%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.33 | 36.28 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 6 GB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 100 Watt |
ATI Mobility HD 3870 has 81.8% lower power consumption.
RTX 4050, on the other hand, has a 2627.8% higher aggregate performance score, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1000% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 4050 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 3870 in performance tests.
Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 3870 is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 4050 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.
