ATI Radeon HD 4850 vs Pro 560X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro 560X with Radeon HD 4850, including specs and performance data.

Pro 560X
2018
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
9.53
+258%

Pro 560X outperforms ATI HD 4850 by a whopping 258% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking462807
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.21
Power efficiency8.861.69
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code namePolaris 21RV770
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date16 July 2018 (6 years ago)25 June 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$199

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 cores1024800
Core clock speed1004 MHz625 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million956 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt110 Watt
Texture fill rate64.2625.00
Floating-point processing power2.056 TFLOPS1 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs6440

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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data246 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1270 MHz993 MHz
Memory bandwidth81.28 GB/s63.55 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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x 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.

DirectX12 (12_0)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.44.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/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 9.53
+258%
ATI HD 4850 2.66

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
+258%
ATI HD 4850 1026

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Pro 560X 32449
+188%
ATI HD 4850 11272

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Pro 560X 255217
+250%
ATI HD 4850 72891

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:

900p100−110
+245%
29
−245%
Full HD39
−2.6%
40
+2.6%
1200p65−70
+242%
19
−242%
1440p26
+271%
7−8
−271%
4K15
+275%
4−5
−275%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.98
1440pno data28.43
4Kno data49.75

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 31
+244%
9−10
−244%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16 0−1
Battlefield 5 49
+1125%
4−5
−1125%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 29
+314%
7−8
−314%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Far Cry 5 28
+460%
5−6
−460%
Far Cry New Dawn 38
+443%
7−8
−443%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+392%
12−14
−392%
Hitman 3 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+152%
21−24
−152%
Metro Exodus 41
+1950%
2−3
−1950%
Red Dead Redemption 2 36
+500%
6−7
−500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 57
+418%
10−12
−418%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+63.2%
35−40
−63.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50
+456%
9−10
−456%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16 0−1
Battlefield 5 42
+950%
4−5
−950%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 25
+257%
7−8
−257%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Far Cry 5 26
+420%
5−6
−420%
Far Cry New Dawn 28
+300%
7−8
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+392%
12−14
−392%
Hitman 3 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+152%
21−24
−152%
Metro Exodus 33
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
Red Dead Redemption 2 29
+383%
6−7
−383%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+182%
10−12
−182%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+63.2%
35−40
−63.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18
+157%
7−8
−157%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Far Cry 5 19
+280%
5−6
−280%
Forza Horizon 4 36
+177%
12−14
−177%
Hitman 3 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+152%
21−24
−152%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+182%
10−12
−182%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+63.2%
35−40
−63.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 25
+317%
6−7
−317%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+375%
4−5
−375%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+310%
10−11
−310%
Hitman 3 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+186%
7−8
−186%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+275%
16−18
−275%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16
+167%
6−7
−167%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Hitman 3 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+300%
10−11
−300%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%

This is how Pro 560X and ATI HD 4850 compete in popular games:

  • Pro 560X is 245% faster in 900p
  • ATI HD 4850 is 3% faster in 1080p
  • Pro 560X is 242% faster in 1200p
  • Pro 560X is 271% faster in 1440p
  • Pro 560X is 275% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Pro 560X is 1950% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Pro 560X surpassed ATI HD 4850 in all 57 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.53 2.66
Recency 16 July 2018 25 June 2008
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 110 Watt

Pro 560X has a 258.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 46.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 560X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4850 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 560X is a mobile workstation card while Radeon HD 4850 is a desktop one.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon Pro 560X
Radeon Pro 560X
ATI Radeon HD 4850
Radeon HD 4850

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 177 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 560X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 265 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4850 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.