This model is from the same generation as the Radeon HD 4800. It is in fact a lower end version, giving lower performance, designed for those who don’t play games much or who don’t want to bankrupt themselves. It can be compared to the 9600 GT 512 MB from NVIDIA. The NVIDIA model is out front with performance gains of between 10% and 15% on a small screen (= 5/4 screen, 19" and less). If you look at the rest of the ATI range, the model up from this is the HD 4830. A gulf separates the two cards with an average difference of 30% on small and medium-sized screens (= screens of 22 inches and less). This is definitely worth bearing in mind when you look at the difference in price between the two cards.


When you look at the overall performance of the card, it is clear that it has been designed for users with screens of under 19 inches (with a 5/4 ratio). And even on a screen of this size, you need to make some concessions when it comes to the graphic details and avoid using texturing filters. If you reduce the details, it is possible to play all the games that came out in 2008. For those to come, it won’t be as easy and you’d better not be too demanding when it comes to fineness of graphic detail. For those who use a larger screen (= 20 inches and more) you’ll need a model with a bit more under the bonnet.

Size, energy consumption and noise

The Radeon HD 4670 is a very short model at just 15 cm. The stock heatsink is very small, a good point in terms of freeing up a PCI port. At 93w idling (for the whole machine) and 189w with intense 3D activated, energy consumption is quite contained. This data is comparable to the 118w and 217w readings taken for the NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GT. For noise levels, we can’t draw any conclusions as the model that we tested had a different heatsink (see inset).