ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4330 vs HD 8280
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 8280 with Mobility Radeon HD 4330, including specs and performance data.
HD 8280 outperforms Mobility HD 4330 by an impressive 94% 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 | 1261 | 1379 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.18 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | TeraScale (2005−2013) |
| GPU code name | Kalindi | M92 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 18 September 2013 (12 years ago) | 9 January 2009 (17 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 | 128 | 80 |
| Core clock speed | 450 MHz | 450 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 242 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 3.600 | 3.600 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1152 TFLOPS | 0.072 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 4 |
| TMUs | 8 | 8 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 16 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 64 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).
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Width | IGP | 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 | System Shared | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 600 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 9.6 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 | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 10.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+7.7%
|
24−27
−7.7%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 18−20
+35.7%
|
14−16
−35.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+7.7%
|
24−27
−7.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+7.7%
|
24−27
−7.7%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the HD 8280 is 133% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD 8280 performs better in 17 tests (65%)
- there's a draw in 9 tests (35%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.62 | 0.32 |
| Recency | 18 September 2013 | 9 January 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 55 nm |
HD 8280 has a 94% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 96% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon HD 8280 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 4330 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 8280 is a desktop graphics card while Mobility Radeon HD 4330 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
