Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) vs GeForce GT 445M

Place in the ranking	878	904
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	4.14	2.99
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	GCN 1.2 (2016)
GPU code name	GF106	Bristol Ridge
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	3 September 2010 (14 years ago)	1 June 2016 (8 years ago)

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	144	512
Core clock speed	590 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	no data	900 MHz
Number of transistors	1,170 million	2410 Million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	12-45 Watt
Texture fill rate	14.16	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.3398 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	24	no data
TMUs	24	no data

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	large	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	no data
SLI options	+	-

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	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	no data
Memory bus width	192 Bit	64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1250 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	60.0 GB/s	no data
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

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	12 (FL 12_0)
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.5	no data
OpenCL	1.1	no data
Vulkan	N/A	-
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 445M 2.11
+7.7%

R7 (Bristol Ridge) 1.96

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 445M 811
+7.6%

R7 (Bristol Ridge) 754

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 445M 1148

R7 (Bristol Ridge) 1852
+61.3%

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 445M 5249

R7 (Bristol Ridge) 5568
+6.1%

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	19 +18.8%	16−18 −18.8%
Full HD	32 +146%	13 −146%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Elden Ring	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Dota 2	4−5 −125%	9 +125%
Elden Ring	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Fortnite	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	5−6 +0%	5 +0%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 −23.8%	26 +23.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +12.5%	8 −12.5%
World of Tanks	40−45 +5.3%	35−40 −5.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Dota 2	4−5 −250%	14 +250%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +10.5%	18−20 −10.5%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 +7.7%	12−14 −7.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
World of Tanks	14−16 +16.7%	12−14 −16.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Valorant	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Elden Ring	1−2	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Fortnite	0−1	0−1
Valorant	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

This is how GT 445M and R7 (Bristol Ridge) compete in popular games:

GT 445M is 19% faster in 900p
GT 445M is 146% faster in 1080p

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

in Far Cry 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 445M is 100% faster.
in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R7 (Bristol Ridge) is 250% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GT 445M is ahead in 16 tests (33%)
R7 (Bristol Ridge) is ahead in 3 tests (6%)
there's a draw in 30 tests (61%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.11	1.96
Recency	3 September 2010	1 June 2016
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	12 Watt

GT 445M has a 7.7% higher aggregate performance score.

R7 (Bristol Ridge), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 191.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GT 445M and Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge).

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