GeForce GT 630 vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4850

Place in the ranking	952	930
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.08
Power efficiency	no data	1.87
Architecture	TeraScale (2005−2013)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	M98	GF108
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	9 January 2009 (16 years ago)	15 May 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$99.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	800	96
Core clock speed	500 MHz	810 MHz
Number of transistors	956 million	585 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	65 Watt
Texture fill rate	20.00	12.96
Floating-point processing power	0.8 TFLOPS	0.311 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	4
TMUs	40	16

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 2.0 x16
Length	no data	145 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
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	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	850 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	54.4 GB/s	28.8 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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 DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	10.1 (10_1)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	4.1	5.1
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	-	2.1

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

−2.6%

40−45
+2.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

2.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Dota 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Fortnite	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
World of Tanks	30−35 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Dota 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
World of Tanks	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +3.3%	30−33 −3.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Valorant	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Valorant	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

This is how ATI Mobility HD 4850 and GT 630 compete in popular games:

GT 630 is 3% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.65	1.76
Recency	9 January 2009	15 May 2012
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	40 nm

GT 630 has a 6.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Mobility Radeon HD 4850 and GeForce GT 630.

Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 4850 is a notebook card while GeForce GT 630 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.