ATI Radeon HD 5770 vs Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS

Place in the ranking	435	668
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.90
Power efficiency	24.45	2.83
Architecture	no data	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code name	no data	Juniper
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	no data	13 October 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$159

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	1536	800
Core clock speed	no data	850 MHz
Boost clock speed	1250 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	no data	1,040 million
Manufacturing process technology	4 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	108 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	34.00
Floating-point processing power	no data	1.36 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	16
TMUs	no data	40

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	no data	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	208 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 6-pin

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	LPDDR5x	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	no data	1 GB
Memory bus width	no data	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	8448 MHz	4800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	76.8 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	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12_1	11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model	no data	5.0
OpenGL	no data	4.4
OpenCL	no data	1.2
Vulkan	-	N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS 10.64
+140%

ATI HD 5770 4.44

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS 6346
+163%

ATI HD 5770 2410

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	55−60 +129%	24 −129%
Full HD	35 −40%	49 +40%
1440p	17 +143%	7−8 −143%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	3.24
1440p	no data	22.71

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2

23
+130%

10−11

−130%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +169%	12−14 −169%
Counter-Strike 2	19 +90%	10−11 −90%
Forza Horizon 4	50 +163%	18−20 −163%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 +238%	8−9 −238%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +190%	10−11 −190%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +100%	14−16 −100%
Valorant	40−45 +273%	10−12 −273%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +169%	12−14 −169%
Counter-Strike 2	16 +60%	10−11 −60%
Dota 2	35 +150%	14−16 −150%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +95.5%	21−24 −95.5%
Fortnite	60−65 +138%	24−27 −138%
Forza Horizon 4	42 +121%	18−20 −121%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 +238%	8−9 −238%
Grand Theft Auto V	35 +150%	14−16 −150%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +190%	10−11 −190%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 +113%	35−40 −113%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +100%	14−16 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +113%	14−16 −113%
Valorant	40−45 +273%	10−12 −273%
World of Tanks	150−160 +104%	70−75 −104%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +169%	12−14 −169%
Counter-Strike 2	14 +40%	10−11 −40%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +95.5%	21−24 −95.5%
Forza Horizon 4	36 +89.5%	18−20 −89.5%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 +238%	8−9 −238%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 +113%	35−40 −113%
Valorant	40−45 +273%	10−12 −273%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	15 +275%	4−5 −275%
Grand Theft Auto V	15 +275%	4−5 −275%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
World of Tanks	75−80 +138%	30−35 −138%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +250%	6−7 −250%
Counter-Strike 2	9 −256%	30−35 +256%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +130%	10−11 −130%
Forza Horizon 4	28 +367%	6−7 −367%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +950%	2−3 −950%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +100%	7−8 −100%
Valorant	24−27 +100%	12−14 −100%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Dota 2	21−24 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%
Metro Exodus	6−7	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +138%	12−14 −138%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Counter-Strike 2	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Fortnite	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +367%	3−4 −367%
Forza Horizon 5	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Valorant	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−11

+0%

10−11

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−11

+0%

10−11

+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−11

+0%

10−11

+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

30−33

+0%

30−33

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6

+0%

5−6

+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

This is how Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS and ATI HD 5770 compete in popular games:

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is 129% faster in 900p
ATI HD 5770 is 40% faster in 1080p
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is 143% faster in 1440p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is 950% faster.
in Counter-Strike 2, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the ATI HD 5770 is 256% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is ahead in 51 test (84%)
ATI HD 5770 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
there's a draw in 9 tests (15%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	10.64	4.44
Chip lithography	4 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	108 Watt

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS has a 139.6% higher aggregate performance score, a 900% more advanced lithography process, and 260% lower power consumption.

The Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 5770 in performance tests.

Be aware that Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is a notebook card while Radeon HD 5770 is a desktop one.

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