ATI Radeon HD 3850 vs Pro 560X

Place in the ranking	464	1104
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.04
Power efficiency	8.72	0.93
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code name	Polaris 21	RV670
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	16 July 2018 (6 years ago)	19 November 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$179

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	1024	320
Core clock speed	1004 MHz	668 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	666 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	64.26	10.69
Floating-point processing power	2.056 TFLOPS	0.4275 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	64	16

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
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	208 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1270 MHz	830 MHz
Memory bandwidth	81.28 GB/s	53.12 GB/s
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

2x DVI, 1x S-Video

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_0)	10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	6.4	4.1
OpenGL	4.6	3.3
OpenCL	2.0	N/A
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Pro 560X 9.54
+835%

ATI HD 3850 1.02

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.

Pro 560X 3677
+838%

ATI HD 3850 392

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	41 +925%	4−5 −925%
1440p	39 +875%	4−5 −875%
4K	12 +1100%	1−2 −1100%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	44.75
1440p	no data	44.75
4K	no data	179.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16
+1400%

1−2

−1400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	31 +933%	3−4 −933%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Battlefield 5	49 +880%	5−6 −880%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	29 +867%	3−4 −867%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Far Cry 5	28 +1300%	2−3 −1300%
Far Cry New Dawn	38 +850%	4−5 −850%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +967%	6−7 −967%
Hitman 3	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +960%	5−6 −960%
Metro Exodus	41 +925%	4−5 −925%
Red Dead Redemption 2	36 +1100%	3−4 −1100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	57 +850%	6−7 −850%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +933%	6−7 −933%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50 +900%	5−6 −900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Battlefield 5	42 +950%	4−5 −950%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	25 +1150%	2−3 −1150%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Far Cry 5	26 +1200%	2−3 −1200%
Far Cry New Dawn	28 +1300%	2−3 −1300%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +967%	6−7 −967%
Hitman 3	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +960%	5−6 −960%
Metro Exodus	33 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	29 +867%	3−4 −867%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +933%	3−4 −933%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +1200%	2−3 −1200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +933%	6−7 −933%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Far Cry 5	19 +850%	2−3 −850%
Forza Horizon 4	36 +1100%	3−4 −1100%
Hitman 3	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +960%	5−6 −960%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +933%	3−4 −933%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20 +900%	2−3 −900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +933%	6−7 −933%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

25
+1150%

2−3

−1150%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +925%	4−5 −925%
Hitman 3	12−14 +1200%	1−2 −1200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +900%	2−3 −900%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +900%	6−7 −900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16
+1500%

1−2

−1500%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8	0−1
Hitman 3	6−7	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +900%	4−5 −900%
Metro Exodus	7−8	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10

0−1

This is how Pro 560X and ATI HD 3850 compete in popular games:

Pro 560X is 925% faster in 1080p
Pro 560X is 875% faster in 1440p
Pro 560X is 1100% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.54	1.02
Recency	16 July 2018	19 November 2007
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	55 nm

Pro 560X has a 835.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro 560X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 3850 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 560X is a mobile workstation card while Radeon HD 3850 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.