GeForce GT 430 vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5870 Crossfire
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 5870 Crossfire with GeForce GT 430, including specs and performance data.
ATI Mobility HD 5870 Crossfire outperforms GT 430 by a whopping 214% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 639 | 972 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.05 |
| Power efficiency | 2.81 | 2.19 |
| Architecture | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) | Fermi (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Broadway-XT | GF108 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 7 January 2010 (15 years ago) | 11 October 2010 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $79 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 | 1600 | 96 |
| CUDA cores per GPU | no data | 96 |
| Core clock speed | 700 MHz | 700 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 585 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 49 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 98 °C |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 11.20 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.2688 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 4 |
| TMUs | no data | 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 |
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 145 mm |
| Height | no data | 2.713" (6.9 cm) |
| 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 | DDR3, GDDR3, GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2x1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | 800 - 900 MHz (1600 - 1800 data rate) |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 - 28.8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 data | HDMIVGA (optional)Mini HDMIDual Link DVI |
| HDMI | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | Internal |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.2 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| CUDA | - | + |
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 | 53
+231%
| 16−18
−231%
|
| Full HD | 52
+225%
| 16−18
−225%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 4.94 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+57.1%
|
7−8
−57.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Elden Ring | 12−14
+333%
|
3−4
−333%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+650%
|
2−3
−650%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+57.1%
|
7−8
−57.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+110%
|
10−11
−110%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+1100%
|
1−2
−1100%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 14−16
+114%
|
7−8
−114%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
+250%
|
4−5
−250%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+650%
|
2−3
−650%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+57.1%
|
7−8
−57.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+700%
|
2−3
−700%
|
| Elden Ring | 12−14
+333%
|
3−4
−333%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+118%
|
10−12
−118%
|
| Fortnite | 27−30
+314%
|
7−8
−314%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+110%
|
10−11
−110%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+700%
|
2−3
−700%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+1100%
|
1−2
−1100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+163%
|
16−18
−163%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 14−16
+114%
|
7−8
−114%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
+250%
|
4−5
−250%
|
| World of Tanks | 80−85
+150%
|
30−35
−150%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+650%
|
2−3
−650%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+57.1%
|
7−8
−57.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+700%
|
2−3
−700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+118%
|
10−12
−118%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+110%
|
10−11
−110%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+163%
|
16−18
−163%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
+250%
|
4−5
−250%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Elden Ring | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+220%
|
10−11
−220%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| World of Tanks | 35−40
+289%
|
9−10
−289%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
+85.7%
|
7−8
−85.7%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Elden Ring | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+250%
|
4−5
−250%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Fortnite | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
This is how ATI Mobility HD 5870 Crossfire and GT 430 compete in popular games:
- ATI Mobility HD 5870 Crossfire is 231% faster in 900p
- ATI Mobility HD 5870 Crossfire is 225% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the ATI Mobility HD 5870 Crossfire is 1100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- ATI Mobility HD 5870 Crossfire is ahead in 45 tests (96%)
- there's a draw in 2 tests (4%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.90 | 1.56 |
| Recency | 7 January 2010 | 11 October 2010 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 49 Watt |
ATI Mobility HD 5870 Crossfire has a 214.1% higher aggregate performance score.
GT 430, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 months, and 144.9% lower power consumption.
The Mobility Radeon HD 5870 Crossfire is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 430 in performance tests.
Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 5870 Crossfire is a notebook card while GeForce GT 430 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
