GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4530
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 4530 and GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
1050 Max-Q outperforms Mobility HD 4530 by a whopping 2574% 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 | 1336 | 498 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 9.58 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | M92 | GP107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 9 January 2009 (16 years ago) | 3 January 2018 (7 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 | 80 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 1190 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1328 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 242 million | 3,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.000 | 53.12 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.08 TFLOPS | 1.7 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 16 |
| TMUs | 8 | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 16 KB | 240 KB |
| L2 Cache | 64 KB | 1024 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 size | no data | large |
| Interface | MXM-II | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | 1752 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 11.2 GB/s | 112.1 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 | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | - | 6.1 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
3DMark Vantage Performance
3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 1−2
−4500%
| 46
+4500%
|
| 1440p | 1−2
−2600%
| 27
+2600%
|
| 4K | 0−1 | 15 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1800%
|
18−20
+1800%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1800%
|
18−20
+1800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−925%
|
40−45
+925%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−386%
|
30−35
+386%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−254%
|
90−95
+254%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−929%
|
144
+929%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1800%
|
18−20
+1800%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−1060%
|
116
+1060%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−925%
|
40−45
+925%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−629%
|
51
+629%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−600%
|
35
+600%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−254%
|
90−95
+254%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1800%
|
18−20
+1800%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−940%
|
104
+940%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−925%
|
40−45
+925%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−386%
|
34
+386%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−320%
|
21
+320%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−254%
|
90−95
+254%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−500%
|
18−20
+500%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 0−1 | 94 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−1125%
|
45−50
+1125%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Escape from Tarkov | 2−3
−800%
|
18−20
+800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−2200%
|
21−24
+2200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−1200%
|
12−14
+1200%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 20−22 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−100%
|
28
+100%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−1000%
|
11
+1000%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−350%
|
9
+350%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 46
+0%
|
46
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 37
+0%
|
37
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 112
+0%
|
112
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 40
+0%
|
40
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 34
+0%
|
34
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 49
+0%
|
49
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 45
+0%
|
45
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 19
+0%
|
19
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 37
+0%
|
37
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 31
+0%
|
31
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 37
+0%
|
37
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 11
+0%
|
11
+0%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 22
+0%
|
22
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 53
+0%
|
53
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7
+0%
|
7
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 13
+0%
|
13
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 37
+0%
|
37
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 11
+0%
|
11
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
This is how ATI Mobility HD 4530 and GTX 1050 Max-Q compete in popular games:
- GTX 1050 Max-Q is 4500% faster in 1080p
- GTX 1050 Max-Q is 2600% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1050 Max-Q is 2400% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- GTX 1050 Max-Q performs better in 27 tests (43%)
- there's a draw in 36 tests (57%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.35 | 9.36 |
| Recency | 9 January 2009 | 3 January 2018 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 14 nm |
GTX 1050 Max-Q has a 2574.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 4530 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
