GeForce MX230 vs ATI Radeon HD 4850

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 4850 with GeForce MX230, including specs and performance data.

ATI HD 4850
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 110 Watt
2.66

MX230 outperforms ATI HD 4850 by an impressive 79% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking811645
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.26no data
Power efficiency1.6632.56
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameRV770GP108
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date25 June 2008 (16 years ago)21 February 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 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 cores800256
Core clock speed625 MHz1519 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1582 MHz
Number of transistors956 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate25.0025.31
Floating-point processing power1 TFLOPS0.81 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs4016

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length246 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed993 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth63.55 GB/s48.06 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX10.1 (10_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA-+

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.

ATI HD 4850 2.66
GeForce MX230 4.75
+78.6%

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 4850 1026
GeForce MX230 1830
+78.4%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

ATI HD 4850 11272
GeForce MX230 15797
+40.1%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

ATI HD 4850 72891
GeForce MX230 183041
+151%

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:

900p29
−72.4%
50−55
+72.4%
Full HD40
+90.5%
21
−90.5%
1200p19
−57.9%
30−35
+57.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.98no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−44.4%
13
+44.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 5−6
Battlefield 5 4−5
−375%
19
+375%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−100%
14
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−180%
14
+180%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−143%
17
+143%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−354%
59
+354%
Hitman 3 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−47.6%
30−35
+47.6%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−800%
18
+800%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
−109%
23
+109%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−18.4%
45−50
+18.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−77.8%
16
+77.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 5−6
Battlefield 5 4−5
−225%
13
+225%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−85.7%
13
+85.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−140%
12
+140%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−71.4%
12
+71.4%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−308%
53
+308%
Hitman 3 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−47.6%
30−35
+47.6%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−550%
13
+550%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
−54.5%
16−18
+54.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−30.8%
16−18
+30.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−18.4%
45−50
+18.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+50%
6
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 5−6
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−28.6%
9
+28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−40%
7
+40%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+8.3%
12
−8.3%
Hitman 3 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−47.6%
30−35
+47.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
−54.5%
16−18
+54.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+44.4%
9
−44.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−18.4%
45−50
+18.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Hitman 3 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
−87.5%
30−33
+87.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 1−2

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how ATI HD 4850 and GeForce MX230 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce MX230 is 72% faster in 900p
  • ATI HD 4850 is 90% faster in 1080p
  • GeForce MX230 is 58% faster in 1200p

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

  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the ATI HD 4850 is 50% faster.
  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX230 is 800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • ATI HD 4850 is ahead in 3 tests (5%)
  • GeForce MX230 is ahead in 54 tests (84%)
  • there's a draw in 7 tests (11%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.66 4.75
Recency 25 June 2008 21 February 2019
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 10 Watt

GeForce MX230 has a 78.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 1000% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX230 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4850 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 4850 is a desktop card while GeForce MX230 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 4850
Radeon HD 4850
NVIDIA GeForce MX230
GeForce MX230

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.


3.9 266 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4850 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 1387 votes

Rate GeForce MX230 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.