Radeon HD 6450A vs HD 8330
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 8330 with Radeon HD 6450A, including specs and performance data.
HD 8330 outperforms HD 6450A by a small 6% 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 | 1242 | 1260 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.39 | 1.91 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | Kalindi | Caicos |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 13 August 2013 (12 years ago) | 7 April 2011 (15 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 | 160 |
| Core clock speed | 497 MHz | 625 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 370 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 25 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 3.976 | 5.000 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1272 TFLOPS | 0.2 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 4 |
| TMUs | 8 | 8 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 16 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 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).
| Interface | IGP | MXM-A (3.0) |
| 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 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 533 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 8.528 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | no data |
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) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.
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:
| Full HD | 11
+10%
| 10−12
−10%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| 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
+7.4%
|
27−30
−7.4%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 20−22
+11.1%
|
18−20
−11.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| 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 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+7.4%
|
27−30
−7.4%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| 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 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+7.4%
|
27−30
−7.4%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
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
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Valorant | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
This is how HD 8330 and HD 6450A compete in popular games:
- HD 8330 is 10% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.66 | 0.62 |
| Recency | 13 August 2013 | 7 April 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 25 Watt |
HD 8330 has a 6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 43% more advanced lithography process, and 67% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon HD 8330 and Radeon HD 6450A.
Be aware that Radeon HD 8330 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon HD 6450A 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.
