Radeon HD 6450 vs HD 6850M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 6850M with Radeon HD 6450, including specs and performance data.
HD 6850M outperforms HD 6450 by a whopping 302% 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 | 904 | 1253 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.77 | 1.91 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | Granville | Caicos |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Design | no data | reference |
| Release date | 4 January 2011 (14 years ago) | 7 April 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $55 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 | 160 |
| Core clock speed | 675 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 750 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,040 million | 370 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 30 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 27.00 | 5.000 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.08 TFLOPS | 0.2 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 4 |
| TMUs | 40 | 8 |
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 | large | no data |
| Bus support | no data | PCIe 2.0 x8 |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 168 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| 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 | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 8.5-12.8 GB/x (DDR3) or 25.6-28.8 GB/s (GDDR5) |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
| Eyefinity | - | + |
| Number of Eyefinity displays | no data | 4 |
| HDMI | - | + |
| DisplayPort support | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| CrossFire | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | DirectX® 11 |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 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 | 20
+400%
| 4−5
−400%
|
| Full HD | 26
+333%
| 6−7
−333%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 9.17 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+322%
|
9−10
−322%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
+333%
|
9−10
−333%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 21−24
+320%
|
5−6
−320%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+322%
|
9−10
−322%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 21−24
+320%
|
5−6
−320%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+322%
|
9−10
−322%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
+333%
|
3−4
−333%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+375%
|
4−5
−375%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
+367%
|
3−4
−367%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+400%
|
3−4
−400%
|
| Valorant | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4 | 0−1 |
This is how HD 6850M and HD 6450 compete in popular games:
- HD 6850M is 400% faster in 900p
- HD 6850M is 333% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.89 | 0.47 |
| Recency | 4 January 2011 | 7 April 2011 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 30 Watt |
HD 6850M has a 302.1% higher aggregate performance score.
HD 6450, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 months, and 66.7% lower power consumption.
The Radeon HD 6850M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6450 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 6850M is a notebook card while Radeon HD 6450 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.
