Radeon Vega 7 vs ATI Mobility HD 3870
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 3870 and Radeon Vega 7, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Vega 7 outperforms ATI Mobility HD 3870 by a whopping 434% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1011 | 534 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 12 |
| Power efficiency | 1.75 | 11.43 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | GCN 5.1 (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | M88 | Cezanne |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 4 June 2008 (16 years ago) | 13 April 2021 (3 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 | 320 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 660 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1900 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 666 million | 9,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 45 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 10.56 | 53.20 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.4224 TFLOPS | 1.702 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 8 |
| TMUs | 16 | 28 |
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 | PCIe 2.0 x16 | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | GDDR3 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 850 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 54.4 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 outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
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 HD | 4−5
−475%
| 23
+475%
|
| 1440p | 4−5
−525%
| 25
+525%
|
| 4K | 2−3
−650%
| 15
+650%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−100%
|
14−16
+100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−425%
|
21−24
+425%
|
| Elden Ring | 2−3
−600%
|
14
+600%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−100%
|
14−16
+100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−425%
|
21−24
+425%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−222%
|
29
+222%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 21 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
−286%
|
27
+286%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−100%
|
14−16
+100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−425%
|
21−24
+425%
|
| Dota 2 | 1−2
−1600%
|
17
+1600%
|
| Elden Ring | 2−3
−700%
|
16
+700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−155%
|
28
+155%
|
| Fortnite | 6−7
−633%
|
40−45
+633%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−167%
|
24
+167%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
−400%
|
10−11
+400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 15 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
−207%
|
46
+207%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
−200%
|
21−24
+200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−229%
|
21−24
+229%
|
| World of Tanks | 27−30
−100%
|
58
+100%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−100%
|
14−16
+100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−425%
|
21−24
+425%
|
| Dota 2 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−200%
|
30−35
+200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−133%
|
21
+133%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
−300%
|
60−65
+300%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Elden Ring | 0−1 | 10−11 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−400%
|
45−50
+400%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 6−7 |
| World of Tanks | 8−9
−575%
|
50−55
+575%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−433%
|
16−18
+433%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−220%
|
16−18
+220%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−380%
|
24−27
+380%
|
| Valorant | 7−8
−171%
|
18−20
+171%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−12.5%
|
18−20
+12.5%
|
| Elden Ring | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−433%
|
80−85
+433%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−450%
|
21−24
+450%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 5−6 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−20%
|
18−20
+20%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−500%
|
6−7
+500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−400%
|
10−11
+400%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−431%
|
85−90
+431%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−800%
|
9−10
+800%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−600%
|
7−8
+600%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Valorant | 29
+0%
|
29
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Valorant | 14
+0%
|
14
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Valorant | 25
+0%
|
25
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
This is how ATI Mobility HD 3870 and Vega 7 compete in popular games:
- Vega 7 is 475% faster in 1080p
- Vega 7 is 525% faster in 1440p
- Vega 7 is 650% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Vega 7 is 2300% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Vega 7 is ahead in 31 test (70%)
- there's a draw in 13 tests (30%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.40 | 7.48 |
| Recency | 4 June 2008 | 13 April 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 45 Watt |
Vega 7 has a 434.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 685.7% more advanced lithography process, and 22.2% lower power consumption.
The Radeon Vega 7 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 3870 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
