Radeon PRO W7900 vs GeForce 305M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 305M with Radeon PRO W7900, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 305M
2010
Up to 512 MB GDDR3, 14 Watt
0.39

PRO W7900 outperforms 305M by a whopping 19338% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking125913
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data16.79
Power efficiency1.9117.61
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGT218Navi 31
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date10 January 2010 (14 years ago)13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,999

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 cores166144
Core clock speed525 MHz1855 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2495 MHz
Number of transistors260 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt295 Watt
Texture fill rate4.200958.1
Floating-point processing power0.0368 TFLOPS61.32 TFLOPS
Gigaflops55no data
ROPs4192
TMUs8384
Ray Tracing Coresno data96

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).

Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data280 mm
Widthno data3-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amountUp to 512 MB48 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 700 (DDR3), Up to 700 (GDDR3) MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth11.2 GB/s864.0 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 ConnectorsDisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power management8.0no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.7
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.12.2
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+-

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.

GeForce 305M 0.39
PRO W7900 75.81
+19338%

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.

GeForce 305M 150
PRO W7900 29204
+19369%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−17400%
350−400
+17400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−18233%
550−600
+18233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−17400%
350−400
+17400%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−17400%
350−400
+17400%
Hitman 3 4−5
−18650%
750−800
+18650%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−19275%
1550−1600
+19275%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−18650%
750−800
+18650%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−19186%
5400−5450
+19186%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−18233%
550−600
+18233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−17400%
350−400
+17400%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−17400%
350−400
+17400%
Hitman 3 4−5
−18650%
750−800
+18650%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−19275%
1550−1600
+19275%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−18650%
750−800
+18650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−18789%
1700−1750
+18789%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−19186%
5400−5450
+19186%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−18233%
550−600
+18233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−17400%
350−400
+17400%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−17400%
350−400
+17400%
Hitman 3 4−5
−18650%
750−800
+18650%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−19275%
1550−1600
+19275%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−18650%
750−800
+18650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−18789%
1700−1750
+18789%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−19186%
5400−5450
+19186%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
−19067%
1150−1200
+19067%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−17400%
350−400
+17400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−17400%
350−400
+17400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−18900%
190−200
+18900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−17400%
350−400
+17400%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.39 75.81
Recency 10 January 2010 13 April 2023
Chip lithography 40 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 295 Watt

GeForce 305M has 2007.1% lower power consumption.

PRO W7900, on the other hand, has a 19338.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7900 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 305M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 305M is a notebook card while Radeon PRO W7900 is a workstation 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.


NVIDIA GeForce 305M
GeForce 305M
AMD Radeon PRO W7900
Radeon PRO W7900

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.5 4 votes

Rate GeForce 305M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 75 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7900 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.