UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs vs ATI Radeon HD 4850
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 4850 with UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs, including specs and performance data.
Graphics 750 32EUs outperforms HD 4850 by an impressive 61% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 876 | 744 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.22 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.71 | no data |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Gen. 12 (2021−2023) |
| GPU code name | RV770 | Tiger Lake Xe |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 25 June 2008 (17 years ago) | 30 March 2021 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 800 | 32 |
| Core clock speed | 625 MHz | 350 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1450 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 956 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 110 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 25.00 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 1 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | no data |
| TMUs | 40 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | no data |
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 | PCIe 2.0 x16 | no data |
| Length | 246 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | no 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 type | GDDR3 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 993 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 63.55 GB/s | no data |
| 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 Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | no data | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | DirectX 12_1 |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | no data |
| 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.
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.
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 | 28
−60.7%
| 45−50
+60.7%
|
| Full HD | 40
+150%
| 16
−150%
|
| 1200p | 19
−57.9%
| 30−35
+57.9%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 4.98 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−125%
|
18
+125%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 8−9
−87.5%
|
14−16
+87.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−100%
|
14
+100%
|
| Fortnite | 12−14
−91.7%
|
21−24
+91.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−46.2%
|
18−20
+46.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−33.3%
|
16−18
+33.3%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−25.6%
|
50−55
+25.6%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−100%
|
16
+100%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 45−50
−47.9%
|
70−75
+47.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
−36%
|
34
+36%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 8−9
−87.5%
|
14−16
+87.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−85.7%
|
13
+85.7%
|
| Fortnite | 12−14
−91.7%
|
21−24
+91.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−46.2%
|
18−20
+46.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6−7
−117%
|
13
+117%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−50%
|
6
+50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−33.3%
|
16−18
+33.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−25.6%
|
50−55
+25.6%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−87.5%
|
15
+87.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
−24%
|
31
+24%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 8−9
−87.5%
|
14−16
+87.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12
+71.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−46.2%
|
18−20
+46.2%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−33.3%
|
16−18
+33.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−51.2%
|
65−70
+51.2%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 12−14
−91.7%
|
21−24
+91.7%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 18−20
−66.7%
|
30−33
+66.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
−52.2%
|
35−40
+52.2%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
−100%
|
40−45
+100%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
−100%
|
8−9
+100%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
−66.7%
|
20−22
+66.7%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 6−7
−117%
|
12−14
+117%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
This is how ATI HD 4850 and UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs compete in popular games:
- UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs is 61% faster in 900p
- ATI HD 4850 is 150% faster in 1080p
- UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs is 58% faster in 1200p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs is 200% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs performs better in 40 tests (93%)
- there's a draw in 3 tests (7%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.44 | 3.93 |
| Recency | 25 June 2008 | 30 March 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 14 nm |
UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs has a 61.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.
The UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4850 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 4850 is a desktop graphics card while UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
