GeForce GT 220 vs Radeon HD 4870

Place in performance ranking	683	1173
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.27	no data
Architecture	TeraScale (2005−2013)	GT2xx (2009−2012)
GPU code name	RV770	GT216
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	25 June 2008 (16 years ago)	12 October 2009 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$299	$79.99
Current price	$162 (0.5x MSRP)	$121 (1.5x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

ATI HD 4870 and GT 220 have a nearly equal value for money.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	800	48
CUDA cores	no data	48
Core clock speed	750 MHz	625 MHz
Number of transistors	956 million	486 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	58 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105 °C
Texture fill rate	30.00	9.840
Floating-point performance	1,200.0 gflops	144 gflops

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).

Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	250 mm	6.6" (16.8 cm)
Height	no data	4.376" (11.1 cm)
Width	2-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 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	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	3600 MHz	790 MHz
Memory bandwidth	115.2 GB/s	25.3 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 Connectors	2x DVI, 1x S-Video	VGADVIHDMI
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	no data	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	S/PDIF + HDA

API compatibility

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

DirectX	10.1 (10_1)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	4.1	4.1
OpenGL	3.3	3.1
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	no data	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 4870 3.55
+534%

GT 220 0.56

Radeon HD 4870 outperforms GeForce GT 220 by 534% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

ATI HD 4870 1370
+531%

GT 220 217

Radeon HD 4870 outperforms GeForce GT 220 by 531% in Passmark.

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 HD

130−140
+519%

−519%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

18−20

+500%

3−4
−500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Hitman 3	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Horizon Zero Dawn	75−80 +525%	12−14 −525%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40−45 +471%	7−8 −471%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +511%	9−10 −511%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Hitman 3	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Horizon Zero Dawn	75−80 +525%	12−14 −525%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40−45 +471%	7−8 −471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +511%	9−10 −511%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Horizon Zero Dawn	75−80 +525%	12−14 −525%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40−45 +471%	7−8 −471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +511%	9−10 −511%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Hitman 3	35−40 +483%	6−7 −483%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%