Radeon R9 M485X vs HD 6730M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 6730M and Radeon R9 M485X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
R9 M485X outperforms HD 6730M by a whopping 633% 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 | 1088 | 524 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.73 | 2.80 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) |
| GPU code name | Whistler | Amethyst |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 4 January 2011 (15 years ago) | 15 May 2016 (9 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 | 480 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 725 MHz | 723 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 716 million | 5,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 17.40 | 92.54 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.696 TFLOPS | 2.961 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 32 |
| TMUs | 24 | 128 |
| L1 Cache | 48 KB | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 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 | large |
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 160.0 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 | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
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 | 17
−606%
| 120−130
+606%
|
| Full HD | 23
−596%
| 160−170
+596%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−533%
|
18−20
+533%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 0−1 | 16−18 |
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−4000%
|
40−45
+4000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−533%
|
18−20
+533%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−1400%
|
30−33
+1400%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−1767%
|
55−60
+1767%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−400%
|
40−45
+400%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−2700%
|
27−30
+2700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−267%
|
30−35
+267%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−173%
|
90−95
+173%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−4000%
|
40−45
+4000%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 27−30
−386%
|
140−150
+386%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−533%
|
18−20
+533%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−319%
|
65−70
+319%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−1400%
|
30−33
+1400%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−1767%
|
55−60
+1767%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−400%
|
40−45
+400%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−2700%
|
27−30
+2700%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 30−35 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
−800%
|
18−20
+800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−267%
|
30−35
+267%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−243%
|
24−27
+243%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−173%
|
90−95
+173%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−4000%
|
40−45
+4000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−533%
|
18−20
+533%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−319%
|
65−70
+319%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−1400%
|
30−33
+1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−400%
|
40−45
+400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−267%
|
30−35
+267%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−243%
|
24−27
+243%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−173%
|
90−95
+173%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−1767%
|
55−60
+1767%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−325%
|
16−18
+325%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 8−9
−775%
|
70−75
+775%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−269%
|
45−50
+269%
|
| Valorant | 3−4
−3300%
|
100−110
+3300%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 7−8 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−1800%
|
18−20
+1800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−633%
|
21−24
+633%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−550%
|
12−14
+550%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−850%
|
18−20
+850%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−42.9%
|
20−22
+42.9%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−700%
|
45−50
+700%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 1−2
−3300%
|
30−35
+3300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−350%
|
9−10
+350%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−350%
|
9−10
+350%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
This is how HD 6730M and R9 M485X compete in popular games:
- R9 M485X is 606% faster in 900p
- R9 M485X is 596% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R9 M485X is 4000% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- R9 M485X performs better in 43 tests (75%)
- there's a draw in 14 tests (25%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.24 | 9.09 |
| Recency | 4 January 2011 | 15 May 2016 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 250 Watt |
HD 6730M has 614.3% lower power consumption.
R9 M485X, on the other hand, has a 633.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon R9 M485X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6730M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
