Radeon 520 vs GeForce GTX 470M

Place in the ranking	631	884
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	4.66	2.82
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code name	GF104	Banks
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	3 September 2010 (14 years ago)	18 April 2017 (7 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	288	320
Core clock speed	535 MHz	1030 MHz
Number of transistors	1,950 million	690 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	25.68	20.60
Floating-point processing power	0.6163 TFLOPS	0.6592 TFLOPS
ROPs	24	8
TMUs	48	20

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	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x8
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1536 MB	2 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1250 MHz	1125 MHz
Memory bandwidth	60.0 GB/s	36 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	12 (11_1)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
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.

GTX 470M 5.08
+148%

Radeon 520 2.05

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.

GTX 470M 1953
+148%

Radeon 520 787

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.

GTX 470M 2003

Radeon 520 2017
+0.7%

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.

GTX 470M 9801
+86.1%

Radeon 520 5266

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	34 +183%	12−14 −183%
Full HD	48 +269%	13 −269%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +30%	10−11 −30%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Elden Ring	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +275%	4−5 −275%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +30%	10−11 −30%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +90.9%	10−12 −90.9%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
Valorant	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +275%	4−5 −275%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +30%	10−11 −30%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Dota 2	16−18 +183%	6 −183%
Elden Ring	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +92.3%	12−14 −92.3%
Fortnite	30−33 +200%	10−11 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +90.9%	10−12 −90.9%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +325%	4−5 −325%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +139%	18 −139%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%
Valorant	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
World of Tanks	80−85 +113%	35−40 −113%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +275%	4−5 −275%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +30%	10−11 −30%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Dota 2	16−18 −5.9%	18 +5.9%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +92.3%	12−14 −92.3%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +90.9%	10−12 −90.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +115%	20−22 −115%
Valorant	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Elden Ring	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +136%	14−16 −136%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
World of Tanks	35−40 +177%	12−14 −177%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Valorant	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%
Elden Ring	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +6.7%	14−16 −6.7%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +6.7%	14−16 −6.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Dota 2	16−18 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Fortnite	4−5	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Valorant	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%

This is how GTX 470M and Radeon 520 compete in popular games:

GTX 470M is 183% faster in 900p
GTX 470M is 269% faster in 1080p

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 470M is 500% faster.
in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 520 is 6% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 470M is ahead in 48 tests (96%)
Radeon 520 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.08	2.05
Recency	3 September 2010	18 April 2017
Maximum RAM amount	1536 MB	2 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	50 Watt

GTX 470M has a 147.8% higher aggregate performance score.

Radeon 520, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 470M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 520 in performance tests.

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