ATI Radeon X1650 GTO vs ATI HD 4270

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 4270 with Radeon X1650 GTO, including specs and performance data.

ATI HD 4270
2010
512 MB
0.26
+44.4%

HD 4270 outperforms X1650 GTO by a considerable 44% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking14211472
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureRV6xx (2008−2010)R500 (2005−2007)
GPU code nameRS880MRV530
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 May 2010 (15 years ago)2 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 cores40no data
Core clock speed590 MHz587 MHz
Number of transistorsno data157 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm90 nm
Texture fill rateno data2.348
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data4

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataDDR2
Maximum RAM amount512 MB256 MB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data392 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data12.54 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 Connectorsno data1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX10.19.0c (9_3)
Shader Modelno data3.0
OpenGLno data2.0
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

ATI HD 4270 0.26
+44.4%
ATI X1650 GTO 0.18

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

ATI HD 4270 109
+47.3%
Samples: 25
ATI X1650 GTO 74
Samples: 2

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 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Valorant 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Valorant 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Valorant 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Valorant 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.26 0.18
Recency 1 May 2010 2 December 2007
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 256 MB
Chip lithography 55 nm 90 nm

ATI HD 4270 has a 44.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 63.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 4270 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1650 GTO in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 4270 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon X1650 GTO is a desktop one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


ATI Radeon HD 4270
Radeon HD 4270
ATI Radeon X1650 GTO
Radeon X1650 GTO

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


1.2 6 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4270 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon X1650 GTO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 4270 or Radeon X1650 GTO, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.