Notebookcheck Logo

ATI Radeon HD 4200 vs ATI Radeon HD 4270

ATI Radeon HD 4200

► remove from comparison

The AMD ATI (Mobility) Radeon HD 4200 is an onboard (shared Memory) graphics chip (on the RS880M chipset). It is based on the HD 3400 graphics core and features the UVD 2 video engine  to decode HD videos.

Compared to the old HD 3200, the 4200 now supports DirectX 10.1 and features the UVD2 video decoder. The later announced Radeon HD 4250 is just a higher clocked version of the HD 4200.

Hybrid CrossfireX is a new feature of the chipset, that allowes to use the onboard HD 4200 graphics core in conjunction with a dedicated graphics card (of the Mobilty Radeon HD 3400 series) in Crossfire combination to increase the performance (similar to GeForceBoost / HybridSLI of Nvidia). Every frame is rendered by a different graphics core with this technique.

The UVD 2 video engine is able to decode HD videos (H.264 and VC-1 in all stages, MPEG-2 only IDCT) and allows the fluent playback of HD videos (e.g. Blu-ray) with a relative low CPU utilization (called Avivo HD). The HD 3200 was the first onboard graphics card that allows the fluent playback of Blu-ray videos. The UVD 2 on the HD 4200 supports the decoding of two video stream and therefore got a full Blu-Ray support.

The graphics core of the HD 4200 stems from the Mobility Radeon HD 3400 and is therefore DirectX 10.1 capable. Because of the missing graphics memory, the performance of the card is a bit lower than of the HD 3400. Theroretically, dedicated memory chips can be directly added to the chip, making it a dedicated graphics card. Because of pricing it is unclear if any manufacturer will add memory to the chip.

Still older games like Doom 3 or Quake 4 should be barly playable. Compared to older onboad graphic chips (e.g., GMA X3100), the HD 4200 is much faster. Even the Centrino 2 graphics core (GMA 4500M HD) is noticeable slower than the HD 4200. Compared to the HD 3200 the performance should be similar

Using Windows XP, the HD 3200 seems to have problems with current and older drivers, as there is no 2D accelleration. This leads to very slow interactions with windows and scrolling (especially with Firefox as reported in various discussion boards). More information on the topic can be found at Planet 3D Now (de) or the AMD forum. It is still unclear if the HD 4200 also suffers from this problem.

ATI Radeon HD 4270

► remove from comparison

The AMD ATI Radeon HD 4270 (sometimes also ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4270 called) is an onboard (shared Memory) graphics chip in the RS880M chipset. It is based on the HD 3400 graphics core and features the UVD 2 video engine to decode HD videos (Avivo HD - can decode two HD streams simultaneously). Compared to the HD 4250, the 4270 is a higher clocked version.

Compared to the old HD 3200, the 4270 supports DirectX 10.1 and features the UVD2 video decoder.

The UVD 2 video engine is able to decode HD videos (H.264 and VC-1 in all stages, MPEG-2 only IDCT) and allows the fluent playback of HD videos (e.g. Blu-ray) with a relative low CPU utilization (called Avivo HD). The HD 3200 was the first onboard graphics card that allows the fluent playback of Blu-ray videos. The UVD 2 in the HD 4270 supports the decoding of two video stream and therefore got a full Blu-Ray support.

The graphics core of the HD 4270 stems from the Mobility Radeon HD 3400 series and is therefore DirectX 10.1 capable. Because of the missing graphics memory, the performance of the card is a bit lower than of the HD 34x0. Theroretically, dedicated memory chips can be directly added to the chip, making it a dedicated graphics card. Because of pricing it is unclear if any manufacturer will add memory to the chip.

Current (and less demanding games) like Starcraft 2 or Left4Dead are playable in low details in conjunction with a fast CPU. Furthermore older games like Doom 3 or Quake 4 should also be playable with slower processors. Compared to older onboad graphic chips (e.g., GMA 4500MHD), the HD 4270 is much faster. The new Intel HD Graphics in the Core ix Arrandale CPUs, offers a similar performance, but the driver support by AMD should be better.

ATI Radeon HD 4200ATI Radeon HD 4270
Radeon HD 4000 Series
Radeon HD 4270 40 @ 0.59 GHz
Radeon HD 4250 compare 40 @ 0.5 GHz
Radeon HD 4200 40 @ 0.5 GHz
Radeon HD 4225 compare 40 @ 0.38 GHz
Radeon HD 4100 compare 40 @ 0.35 GHz
Radeon HD 4270 40 @ 0.59 GHz
Radeon HD 4250 compare 40 @ 0.5 GHz
Radeon HD 4200 40 @ 0.5 GHz
Radeon HD 4225 compare 40 @ 0.38 GHz
Radeon HD 4100 compare 40 @ 0.35 GHz
CodenameRV620RS880M
ArchitectureRV6xxRV6xx
Pipelines40 - unified40 - unified
Core Speed500 MHz590 MHz
Max. Amount of Memory512 MB512 MB
Shared Memoryyesyes
APIDirectX 10.1, Shader 4.0DirectX 10.1, Shader 4.0
technology55 nm55 nm
FeaturesAvivo HD (UVD 2), PCI-E 2.0, Vari-Bright, HDCP support, Display CacheAvivo HD (UVD2), Hybrid Graphics Technology, PCI-E 2.0, Vari-Bright (Bildschirmhelligkeit automtisch anpassen), HDCP support, Display Cache
Date of Announcement10.09.2009 01.05.2010

Benchmarks

3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Score
330 Points (0%)
3DMark Vantage
3DM Vant. Perf. total + ATI Radeon HD 4200
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. total
min: 204     avg: 236     median: 236 (0%)     max: 268 Points
3DM Vant. Perf. total + ATI Radeon HD 4270
230 Points (0%)
3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX + ATI Radeon HD 4200
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX
min: 155     avg: 179.5     median: 179.5 (0%)     max: 204 Points
3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX + ATI Radeon HD 4270
179 Points (0%)
3DMark 2001SE - 3DMark 2001 - Standard
min: 8743     avg: 9161     median: 9370 (10%)     max: 9370 Points
3DMark 03 - 3DMark 03 - Standard
min: 3662     avg: 3708     median: 3708 (2%)     max: 3754 Points
3668 Points (2%)
3DMark 05 - 3DMark 05 - Standard
min: 3051     avg: 3100     median: 3100 (4%)     max: 3149 Points
2926 Points (4%)
3DMark 06 3DMark 06 - Score Unknown Settings + ATI Radeon HD 4200
3DMark 06
1800 Points (3%)
3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 + ATI Radeon HD 4200
3DMark 06
1465 Points (2%)
3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 + ATI Radeon HD 4270
1402 Points (2%)
3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x768 + ATI Radeon HD 4200
3DMark 06
1682 Points (3%)
3DMark 06 - Standard 1024x768 + ATI Radeon HD 4200
3DMark 06
1960 Points (3%)
Windows 7 Experience Index - Win7 Gaming graphics
5.3 Points (67%)
5.3 Points (67%)
Windows 7 Experience Index - Win7 Graphics
min: 4.1     avg: 4.2     median: 4.2 (53%)     max: 4.2 Points
3.7 Points (47%)
Cinebench R10 Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit) + ATI Radeon HD 4200
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit)
min: 2205     avg: 2229     median: 2229 (9%)     max: 2253 Points
Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit) + ATI Radeon HD 4270
2220 Points (9%)
Cinebench R11.5 Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64 Bit + ATI Radeon HD 4200
Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64 Bit
3.6 fps (1%)
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64 Bit + ATI Radeon HD 4270
3.8 fps (1%)

Average Benchmarks ATI Radeon HD 4200 → 100% n=9

Average Benchmarks ATI Radeon HD 4270 → 98% n=9

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Game Benchmarks

The following benchmarks stem from our benchmarks of review laptops. The performance depends on the used graphics memory, clock rate, processor, system settings, drivers, and operating systems. So the results don't have to be representative for all laptops with this GPU. For detailed information on the benchmark results, click on the fps number.

Fifa 11

Fifa 11

2010
low 800x600
100%
Radeon HD 4200:
59 fps  fps
high 1360x768
100%
Radeon HD 4200:
29.8 fps  fps

Average Gaming ATI Radeon HD 4200 → 100%

Average Gaming 30-70 fps → 100%

For more games that might be playable and a list of all games and graphics cards visit our Gaming List

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2022, 2021
v1.17
log 26. 22:09:06

#0 checking url part for id 1314 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 1823 +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Fri, 24 Jun 2022 17:25:51 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#4 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.049s ... 0.05s

#5 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.002s ... 0.051s

#6 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.051s

#7 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.052s

#8 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.052s

#9 composed specs +0s ... 0.052s

#10 did output specs +0s ... 0.052s

#11 start showIntegratedCPUs +0s ... 0.052s

#12 getting avg benchmarks for device 1314 +0.031s ... 0.083s

#13 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.001s ... 0.084s

#14 got single benchmarks 1314 +0.019s ... 0.103s

#15 getting avg benchmarks for device 1823 +0s ... 0.103s

#16 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.103s

#17 got single benchmarks 1823 +0.004s ... 0.108s

#18 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.108s

#19 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.108s

#20 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.108s

#21 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.108s

#22 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.001s ... 0.109s

#23 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.109s

#24 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.109s

#25 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.11s

#26 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.11s

#27 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.11s

#28 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.11s

#29 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.11s

#30 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.111s

#31 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.111s

#32 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.111s

#33 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.111s

#34 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.112s

#35 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.112s

#36 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.112s

#37 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.113s

#38 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.113s

#39 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.113s

#40 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.113s

#41 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.113s

#42 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.113s

#43 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.113s

#44 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.113s

#45 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.114s

#46 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.114s

#47 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.114s

#48 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.114s

#49 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.114s

#50 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.115s

#51 min, max, avg, median took s +0s ... 0.115s

#52 before gaming benchmark output +0s ... 0.115s

#53 Got 2 rows for game benchmarks. +0.004s ... 0.119s

#54 composed SQL query for gamebenchmarks +0s ... 0.119s

#55 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.119s

#56 got data and put it in $dataArray +0s ... 0.12s

#57 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.002s ... 0.122s

#58 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.122s

#59 benchmarks composed for output. +0s ... 0.122s

#60 calculated avg scores. +0s ... 0.122s

#61 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.071s ... 0.193s

#62 return log +0.002s ... 0.196s

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Graphics Card Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)