Qualcomm Adreno 685 vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5430
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 5430 and Qualcomm Adreno 685, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Qualcomm Adreno 685 outperforms Mobility HD 5430 by a whopping 547% 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 | 1358 | 914 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.74 | 24.20 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | no data |
| GPU code name | Park | no data |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 7 January 2010 (16 years ago) | 6 December 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 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 292 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7 Watt | 7 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.000 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.08 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | no data |
| TMUs | 8 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 8 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 128 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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | no data |
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 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 12.8 GB/s | no data |
| 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 data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
| Vulkan | 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 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−200%
|
12−14
+200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−57.7%
|
40−45
+57.7%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−214%
|
40−45
+214%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−200%
|
12−14
+200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−57.7%
|
40−45
+57.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−200%
|
12−14
+200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−57.7%
|
40−45
+57.7%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 1−2
−1500%
|
16−18
+1500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−425%
|
21−24
+425%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−450%
|
10−12
+450%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Valorant | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 685 is 1500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Qualcomm Adreno 685 performs better in 26 tests (51%)
- there's a draw in 25 tests (49%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.34 | 2.20 |
| Recency | 7 January 2010 | 6 December 2018 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 7 nm |
Qualcomm Adreno 685 has a 547% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 471% more advanced lithography process.
The Qualcomm Adreno 685 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 5430 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.
