Radeon RX 7700 XT vs GeForce GT 420M

Place in the ranking	1103	39
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	71.26
Power efficiency	3.07	16.33
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GF108	Navi 32
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	3 September 2010 (14 years ago)	25 August 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$449

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 cores	96	3456
Core clock speed	500 MHz	1435 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2544 MHz
Number of transistors	585 million	28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	245 Watt
Texture fill rate	8.000	549.5
Floating-point processing power	0.192 TFLOPS	35.17 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	96
TMUs	16	216
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	54

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).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	2x 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 type	DDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	12 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	25.6 GB/s	432.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.7
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
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.

GT 420M 1.03

RX 7700 XT 58.35
+5565%

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.

GT 420M 396

RX 7700 XT 22472
+5575%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GT 420M 685

RX 7700 XT 57340
+8271%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 420M 3051

RX 7700 XT 126733
+4054%

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p	12 −5317%	650−700 +5317%
Full HD	16 −1075%	188 +1075%
1440p	1−2 −10200%	103 +10200%
4K	1−2 −5900%	60 +5900%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.39
1440p	no data	4.36
4K	no data	7.48

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−6333%

193
+6333%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −3200%	165 +3200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −2625%	100−110 +2625%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −5167%	158 +5167%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −10800%	100−110 +10800%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −6850%	130−140 +6850%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	220−230
Hitman 3	5−6 −2260%	110−120 +2260%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −1585%	210−220 +1585%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −11300%	110−120 +11300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −3200%	230−240 +3200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −359%	140−150 +359%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −5340%	272 +5340%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −2625%	100−110 +2625%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −4300%	132 +4300%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −10800%	100−110 +10800%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −6850%	130−140 +6850%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	220−230
Hitman 3	5−6 −2260%	110−120 +2260%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −1585%	210−220 +1585%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −11300%	110−120 +11300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −4671%	334 +4671%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −991%	120−130 +991%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −359%	140−150 +359%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −2320%	121 +2320%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −2625%	100−110 +2625%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −3967%	122 +3967%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −10800%	100−110 +10800%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	231
Hitman 3	5−6 −2260%	110−120 +2260%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −1562%	216 +1562%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −4000%	287 +4000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −1427%	168 +1427%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −359%	140−150 +359%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

1−2

−11300%

110−120
+11300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −12300%	120−130 +12300%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −8900%	90−95 +8900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −9700%	98 +9700%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −7900%	80 +7900%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −6600%	65−70 +6600%
Hitman 3	7−8 −1057%	80−85 +1057%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 −4175%	171 +4175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	120
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −5625%	220−230 +5625%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−2350%

95−100
+2350%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

0−1

50−55

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −5700%	58 +5700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	59
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	40−45
Far Cry 5	0−1	35−40

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−2750%

55−60
+2750%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	180 +0%	180 +0%
Battlefield 5	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%
Metro Exodus	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	149 +0%	149 +0%
Battlefield 5	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%
Metro Exodus	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

132

+0%

132

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	101 +0%	101 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Metro Exodus	134 +0%	134 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	193 +0%	193 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Hitman 3	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%
Metro Exodus	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	89 +0%	89 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	36 +0%	36 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	134 +0%	134 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	97 +0%	97 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

This is how GT 420M and RX 7700 XT compete in popular games:

RX 7700 XT is 5317% faster in 900p
RX 7700 XT is 1075% faster in 1080p
RX 7700 XT is 10200% faster in 1440p
RX 7700 XT is 5900% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 7700 XT is 12300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 7700 XT is ahead in 43 tests (67%)
there's a draw in 21 test (33%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.03	58.35
Recency	3 September 2010	25 August 2023
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	12 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	245 Watt

GT 420M has 965.2% lower power consumption.

RX 7700 XT, on the other hand, has a 5565% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7700 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 420M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 420M is a notebook card while Radeon RX 7700 XT is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.