Radeon HD 4850 vs Quadro CX
Radeon HD 4850
Popular choices:
Quadro CX
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Radeon HD 4850 is positioned at rank 237 and the Quadro CX is on rank 383, so the Radeon HD 4850 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 4850
Performance Per Dollar Quadro CX
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro CX is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.1% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD 4850.
| Insight | Radeon HD 4850 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (246mm) | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon HD 4850 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon HD 4850 holds the technical lead. Priced at $199 (vs $500), it costs 60% less, resulting in a 151% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon HD 4850 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+151%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($199) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon HD 4850 and Quadro CX
Radeon HD 4850
The Radeon HD 4850 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 25 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 110W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 946 points. Launch price was $199.
Quadro CX
The Quadro CX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 947 points. Launch price was $1,999.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon HD 4850 scores 946 and the Quadro CX reaches 947 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 4850 is built on TeraScale while the Quadro CX uses Tesla 2.0, both on a 55 nm process. Shader units: 800 (Radeon HD 4850) vs 192 (Quadro CX). Raw compute: 1 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 4850) vs 0.4623 TFLOPS (Quadro CX).
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 946 | 947 |
| Architecture | TeraScale | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 800+317% | 192 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1 TFLOPS+116% | 0.4623 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 24+50% |
| TMUs | 40 | 64+60% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB+33% | 192 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon HD 4850 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro CX has 4 GB. The Quadro CX offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Radeon HD 4850) vs 192 KB (Quadro CX) — the Radeon HD 4850 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB+33% | 192 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (Radeon HD 4850) vs 11.1 (10_0) (Quadro CX). Vulkan: N/A vs N/A. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 11.1 (10_0)+10% |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (Radeon HD 4850) vs None (Quadro CX). Decoder: UVD 2.2 vs PureVideo HD. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 (Radeon HD 4850) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro CX).
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | UVD 2.2 | PureVideo HD |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 4850 draws 110W versus the Quadro CX's 150W — a 30.8% difference. The Radeon HD 4850 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 450W (Radeon HD 4850) vs 350W (Quadro CX). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 246mm vs 267mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 95 vs 80.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 110W-27% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 450W | 350W-22% |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 246mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 95 | 80-16% |
| Perf/Watt | 8.6+37% | 6.3 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon HD 4850 launched at $199 MSRP and currently averages $199, while the Quadro CX launched at $1999 and now averages $500. The Radeon HD 4850 costs 60.2% less ($301 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 4.8 (Radeon HD 4850) vs 1.9 (Quadro CX) — the Radeon HD 4850 offers 152.6% better value.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $199-90% | $1999 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $199-60% | $500 |
| Performance per Dollar | 4.8+153% | 1.9 |
| Codename | RV770 | GT200B |
| Release | June 25 2008 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #876 | #901 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon HD 4850 and Quadro CX
