NVIDIA
GeForce 210 vs Mobility Radeon HD 4830
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
AMD
Mobility Radeon HD 4830
Aggregate performance score
We've compared 210 and Mobility Radeon HD 4830 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗210 outperforms Mobility Radeon HD 4830 by ~7% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+7%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: GeForce 210 (~58%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider 210
- Higher catalog performance index
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.2 · Not supported
Reasons to consider Mobility Radeon HD 4830
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.1 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIA
AMDPerformance
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3129
10064
4343
Graphics card ranking
Positions 262–267of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Mobility Radeon HD 4830
139 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
31Better
29
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
29Better
27
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
26Better
25
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
26
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
52Better
33
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Boost clockBetter
VRAM
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumption—
Process node
Release date
ArchitectureBetter
Thickness
Compute API
Launch price—
Max monitors
Max resolution
Shader units / coresBetter
Recommended PSU
Length
Die sizeBetter
Memory cacheBetter
Transistor countBetter
USB Type-C
DisplayPort
Device class
DirectX
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumption—
Memory type
Power connector
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Upscaling
Vulkan
HDMI
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares 210 and Mobility Radeon HD 4830 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
210Mobility Radeon HD 4830
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
154 FPS
146 FPS
1080p Ultra
108 FPS
102 FPS
1440p Ultra
58 FPS
55 FPS
4K Ultra
21 FPS
20 FPS
Counter-Strike 2210154 FPSMobility Radeon HD 4830146 FPS210108 FPSMobility Radeon HD 4830102 FPS21058 FPSMobility Radeon HD 483055 FPS21021 FPSMobility Radeon HD 483020 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077210100 FPSMobility Radeon HD 483094 FPS21086 FPSMobility Radeon HD 483081 FPS21042 FPSMobility Radeon HD 483040 FPS21014 FPSMobility Radeon HD 483013 FPS
Forza Horizon 5210126 FPSMobility Radeon HD 4830119 FPS21081 FPSMobility Radeon HD 483077 FPS21052 FPSMobility Radeon HD 483050 FPS21031 FPSMobility Radeon HD 483029 FPS
Hogwarts Legacy21081 FPSMobility Radeon HD 483077 FPS21068 FPSMobility Radeon HD 483064 FPS21038 FPSMobility Radeon HD 483036 FPS21014 FPSMobility Radeon HD 483014 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 10031297%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 10031297%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 10034333%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 10043430%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001000200%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 10036353%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 10036353%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 10034333%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10038373%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10035336%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX10.110.1
VulkanNot supportedNot supported
OpenGL3.33.3
UpscalingNot supportedNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.2OpenCL 1.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureTesla 2.0BetterTeraScale 1
Process node40 nm40 nm
Release date20092009
Device classDesktopMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count260 million826 millionBetter
Die size57 mm²Better137 mm²
Shader units / cores16640Better
Base clock589 MHzBetter500 MHz
Boost clock589 MHzBetter500 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 2x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length168 mmOEM dependent
ThicknessSingle-slotOEM dependent
Recommended PSU200 WOEM dependent
Power connectorNoneIntegrated laptop power
Display outputs and limits
HDMIBoard dependentOEM dependent
DisplayPortDisplayPortOEM dependent
USB Type-CNoOEM dependent
Max monitors3OEM dependent
Max resolution4096 × 2160OEM dependent
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM1 GB DDR31 GB GDDR3
Memory typeDDR3GDDR5 / GDDR3 / DDR3
Memory bus64 bit128 bitBetter
TFLOPS0.0390.64Better
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 67
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (3)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (3)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: 210 or Mobility Radeon HD 4830?+
210 has the higher overall gaming score, while 210 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
210 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
210 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
210 offers more overall performance, while 210 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
210 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
210 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
210 leads in combined 1440p performance. 210 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
210 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
210 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
210 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to 210 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.