ATI Radeon HD 4670 vs RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) with Radeon HD 4670, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
2018
15 Watt
3.05
+208%

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms ATI HD 4670 by a whopping 208% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7721112
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiency14.001.16
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameVega Raven RidgeRV730
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date7 January 2018 (7 years ago)10 September 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$67

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 cores384320
Core clock speed300 MHz750 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHzno data
Number of transistors9,800 million514 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt59 Watt
Texture fill rate40.8024.00
Floating-point processing power1.306 TFLOPS0.48 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs2432

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data193 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared512 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data32 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.44.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.11.1
Vulkan1.2N/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.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 3.05
+208%
ATI HD 4670 0.99

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.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 1173
+209%
ATI HD 4670 379

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 HD14
+250%
4−5
−250%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data16.75

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Elden Ring 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+220%
5−6
−220%
Metro Exodus 8
+300%
2−3
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10
+233%
3−4
−233%
Valorant 13
+225%
4−5
−225%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Dota 2 19
+217%
6−7
−217%
Elden Ring 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Far Cry 5 15
+275%
4−5
−275%
Fortnite 9
+350%
2−3
−350%
Forza Horizon 4 14
+250%
4−5
−250%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
+233%
3−4
−233%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30
+233%
9−10
−233%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Valorant 1−2 0−1
World of Tanks 32
+220%
10−11
−220%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Dota 2 31
+210%
10−11
−210%
Far Cry 5 13
+225%
4−5
−225%
Forza Horizon 4 12
+300%
3−4
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+211%
9−10
−211%
Valorant 1−2 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 1−2 0−1
Elden Ring 3−4 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+214%
7−8
−214%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1
World of Tanks 21−24
+250%
6−7
−250%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Valorant 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Elden Ring 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Fortnite 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Valorant 3−4 0−1

This is how RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and ATI HD 4670 compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 250% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.05 0.99
Recency 7 January 2018 10 September 2008
Chip lithography 14 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 59 Watt

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) has a 208.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 293.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4670 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a notebook card while Radeon HD 4670 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 RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
ATI Radeon HD 4670
Radeon HD 4670

Other comparisons

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.


3.6 71 vote

Rate Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 149 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4670 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.