UHD Graphics 615 vs ATI Radeon HD 4270

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 4270 and UHD Graphics 615, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI HD 4270
2010
512 MB
0.26

Graphics 615 outperforms HD 4270 by a whopping 596% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1412959
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data9.35
ArchitectureRV6xx (2008−2010)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameRS880MAmber Lake GT2
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 May 2010 (15 years ago)7 November 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 cores40192
Core clock speed590 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data900 MHz
Manufacturing process technology55 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data15 Watt
Texture fill rateno data21.60
Floating-point processing powerno data0.3456 TFLOPS
ROPsno data3
TMUsno data24

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 dataRing Bus

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 dataSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount512 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem Shared
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 Connectorsno dataPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX10.112 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3

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
UHD Graphics 615 1.81
+596%

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
Samples: 25
UHD Graphics 615 764
+601%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

ATI HD 4270 230
UHD Graphics 615 3813
+1558%

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:

Full HD1−2
−900%
10
+900%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
Valorant 24−27
−52%
35−40
+52%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Dota 2 9−10
−44.4%
13
+44.4%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Valorant 24−27
−52%
35−40
+52%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Dota 2 9−10
−22.2%
11
+22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Valorant 24−27
−52%
35−40
+52%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%

1440p
Ultra

Escape from Tarkov 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%

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 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Fortnite 8
+0%
8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 1
+0%
1
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1

This is how ATI HD 4270 and UHD Graphics 615 compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 615 is 900% faster in 1080p

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics 615 is 500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 615 performs better in 26 tests (50%)
  • there's a draw in 26 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.26 1.81
Recency 1 May 2010 7 November 2018
Chip lithography 55 nm 14 nm

UHD Graphics 615 has a 596.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics 615 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4270 in performance tests.

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
Intel UHD Graphics 615
UHD Graphics 615

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
2.9 52 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 615 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 UHD Graphics 615, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.