Radeon HD 3870 vs HD 6470M

Place in performance ranking	1168	948
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.03
Architecture	Terascale 2 (2009−2015)	TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code name	Seymour XT	RV670
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	6 January 2011 (13 years ago)	19 November 2007 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$569.99	$269
Current price	$201 (0.4x MSRP)	$195 (0.7x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

HD 6470M and ATI HD 3870 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	160	320
Core clock speed	700 / 750 MHz	777 MHz
Number of transistors	370 million	666 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	106 Watt
Texture fill rate	5.600	12.43
Floating-point performance	224 gflops	497.3 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon HD 6470M and Radeon HD 3870 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	241 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 6-pin

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	DDR3	GDDR4
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	2252 MHz
Memory bandwidth	12.8 GB/s	72.06 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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

No outputs

2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	5.0	4.1
OpenGL	4.4	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A

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.

HD 6470M 0.59

ATI HD 3870 1.44
+144%

HD 3870 outperforms HD 6470M by 144% 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%

HD 6470M 227

ATI HD 3870 555
+144%

HD 3870 outperforms HD 6470M by 144% 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:

900p	10 −140%	24−27 +140%
Full HD	11 −118%	24−27 +118%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−133%

7−8
+133%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Hitman 3	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −118%	24−27 +118%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Hitman 3	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −118%	24−27 +118%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −118%	24−27 +118%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%