ATI Radeon HD 3450 vs ATI Mobility HD 5730
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 5730 with Radeon HD 3450, including specs and performance data.
Mobility HD 5730 outperforms HD 3450 by a whopping 352% 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 | 1070 | 1399 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.88 | 0.89 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | TeraScale (2005−2013) |
| GPU code name | Madison | RV620 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 7 January 2010 (16 years ago) | 10 December 2007 (18 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 | 400 | 40 |
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 627 million | 181 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 26 Watt | 25 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 13.00 | 2.400 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.52 TFLOPS | 0.048 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 4 |
| TMUs | 20 | 4 |
| L1 Cache | 40 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 64 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 | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| 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 | DDR2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
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 | 11.2 (11_0) | 10.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 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.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| 900p | 14
+367%
| 3−4
−367%
|
| Full HD | 18
+500%
| 3−4
−500%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+386%
|
7−8
−386%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−33
+400%
|
6−7
−400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+467%
|
3−4
−467%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+386%
|
7−8
−386%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+467%
|
3−4
−467%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+386%
|
7−8
−386%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5 | 0−1 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+367%
|
3−4
−367%
|
| Valorant | 4−5 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+367%
|
3−4
−367%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
This is how ATI Mobility HD 5730 and ATI HD 3450 compete in popular games:
- ATI Mobility HD 5730 is 367% faster in 900p
- ATI Mobility HD 5730 is 500% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.31 | 0.29 |
| Recency | 7 January 2010 | 10 December 2007 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 256 MB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 26 Watt | 25 Watt |
ATI Mobility HD 5730 has a 351.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.
ATI HD 3450, on the other hand, has 4% lower power consumption.
The Mobility Radeon HD 5730 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 3450 in performance tests.
Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 5730 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon HD 3450 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.
