Radeon PRO W7800 vs GeForce MX450

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX450 with Radeon PRO W7800, including specs and performance data.

GeForce MX450
2020
2 GB GDDR5, GDDR6, 25 Watt
9.69

PRO W7800 outperforms MX450 by a whopping 662% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking46016
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data29.90
Power efficiency26.5719.46
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameN17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1Navi 31
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 August 2020 (4 years ago)13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,499

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 cores8964480
Core clock speed1395 MHz1855 MHz
Boost clock speed1575 MHz2499 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt (12 - 29 Watt TGP)260 Watt
Texture fill rate100.8699.7
Floating-point processing power3.226 TFLOPS44.78 TFLOPS
ROPs32128
TMUs64280
Ray Tracing Coresno data70

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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x4PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data280 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 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 typeGDDR5, GDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB32 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed10000 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth64.03 GB/s576.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.2
Vulkan1.21.3
CUDA7.5-

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 MX450 9.69
PRO W7800 73.80
+662%

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 MX450 3734
PRO W7800 28439
+662%

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:

Full HD29
−659%
220−230
+659%
1440p18
−622%
130−140
+622%
4K30
−633%
220−230
+633%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data11.36
1440pno data19.22
4Kno data11.36

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 32
−650%
240−250
+650%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
−639%
170−180
+639%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10
−650%
75−80
+650%
Battlefield 5 30−33
−633%
220−230
+633%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
−650%
150−160
+650%
Cyberpunk 2077 22
−627%
160−170
+627%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−627%
160−170
+627%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
−641%
200−210
+641%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−603%
450−500
+603%
Hitman 3 30
−633%
220−230
+633%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−655%
400−450
+655%
Metro Exodus 55
−627%
400−450
+627%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45
−567%
300−310
+567%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
−650%
240−250
+650%
Watch Dogs: Legion 94
−645%
700−750
+645%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
−639%
170−180
+639%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6
−650%
45−50
+650%
Battlefield 5 30−33
−633%
220−230
+633%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
−650%
150−160
+650%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
−631%
95−100
+631%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−627%
160−170
+627%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
−641%
200−210
+641%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−603%
450−500
+603%
Hitman 3 29
−659%
220−230
+659%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−655%
400−450
+655%
Metro Exodus 37
−657%
280−290
+657%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
−641%
200−210
+641%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40
−650%
300−310
+650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−631%
190−200
+631%
Watch Dogs: Legion 89
−630%
650−700
+630%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
−639%
170−180
+639%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 11
−627%
80−85
+627%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
−650%
150−160
+650%
Cyberpunk 2077 8
−650%
60−65
+650%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−627%
160−170
+627%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−603%
450−500
+603%
Hitman 3 25
−660%
190−200
+660%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24
−650%
180−190
+650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30
−633%
220−230
+633%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
−650%
150−160
+650%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7
−614%
50−55
+614%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 31
−642%
230−240
+642%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
−637%
140−150
+637%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−633%
110−120
+633%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−622%
65−70
+622%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7
−614%
50−55
+614%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−650%
75−80
+650%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−600%
35−40
+600%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−627%
80−85
+627%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−614%
300−310
+614%
Hitman 3 18
−622%
130−140
+622%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
−650%
150−160
+650%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−614%
100−105
+614%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18
−622%
130−140
+622%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−622%
65−70
+622%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−638%
450−500
+638%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 26
−631%
190−200
+631%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
−622%
65−70
+622%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−614%
50−55
+614%
Hitman 3 6−7
−650%
45−50
+650%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
−632%
300−310
+632%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−650%
60−65
+650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−614%
50−55
+614%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−650%
45−50
+650%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−650%
30−33
+650%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−650%
30−33
+650%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−600%
7−8
+600%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−600%
35−40
+600%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−650%
90−95
+650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−650%
45−50
+650%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
−600%
21−24
+600%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−622%
65−70
+622%

This is how GeForce MX450 and PRO W7800 compete in popular games:

  • PRO W7800 is 659% faster in 1080p
  • PRO W7800 is 622% faster in 1440p
  • PRO W7800 is 633% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.69 73.80
Recency 1 August 2020 13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 260 Watt

GeForce MX450 has 940% lower power consumption.

PRO W7800, on the other hand, has a 661.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 140% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7800 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX450 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX450 is a notebook card while Radeon PRO W7800 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 MX450
GeForce MX450
AMD Radeon PRO W7800
Radeon PRO W7800

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.


3.6 1322 votes

Rate GeForce MX450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 35 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7800 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.