GeForce 805A vs ATI Radeon HD 4830

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking856not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.20no data
Power efficiency1.58no data
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code nameRV770GK208
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date21 October 2008 (16 years ago)22 July 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$130 no data

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 cores640192
Core clock speed575 MHz719 MHz
Boost clock speedno data758 MHz
Number of transistors956 million915 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate18.4012.13
Floating-point processing power0.736 TFLOPS0.2911 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs3216

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length246 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1001 MHz
Memory bandwidth57.6 GB/s16.02 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX10.1 (10_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.15.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA-3.5

Pros & cons summary


Recency 21 October 2008 22 July 2014
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 15 Watt

GeForce 805A has an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 533.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 4830 and GeForce 805A. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 4830 is a desktop card while GeForce 805A is a notebook one.


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

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 4830
Radeon HD 4830
NVIDIA GeForce 805A
GeForce 805A

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.8 41 vote

Rate Radeon HD 4830 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate GeForce 805A on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.