ATI Radeon HD 4810 vs HD 6550M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 6550M with Radeon HD 4810, including specs and performance data.
HD 4810 outperforms HD 6550M by a considerable 47% 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 | 1081 | 959 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.73 | 1.50 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | TeraScale (2005−2013) |
| GPU code name | Lexington | RV770 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 26 November 2010 (15 years ago) | 28 May 2009 (16 years ago) |
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 | 400 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 625 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,154 million | 956 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 26 Watt | 95 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 12.00 | 20.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.48 TFLOPS | 0.8 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 8 |
| TMUs | 20 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 80 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 128 KB |
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 size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | MXM-II | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 246 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.8 GB/s | 57.6 GB/s |
| 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 | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D 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 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
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 | 14
−28.6%
| 18−21
+28.6%
|
| Full HD | 19
−42.1%
| 27−30
+42.1%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−36.4%
|
45−50
+36.4%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 27−30
−37.9%
|
40−45
+37.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−41.2%
|
24−27
+41.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−36.4%
|
45−50
+36.4%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−41.2%
|
24−27
+41.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−36.4%
|
45−50
+36.4%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
| Valorant | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−28.6%
|
18−20
+28.6%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
This is how HD 6550M and ATI HD 4810 compete in popular games:
- ATI HD 4810 is 29% faster in 900p
- ATI HD 4810 is 42% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.26 | 1.85 |
| Recency | 26 November 2010 | 28 May 2009 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 26 Watt | 95 Watt |
HD 6550M has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 38% more advanced lithography process, and 265% lower power consumption.
ATI HD 4810, on the other hand, has a 47% higher aggregate performance score.
The Radeon HD 4810 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6550M in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 6550M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon HD 4810 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
