Quadro 500M vs Radeon HD 8970M Crossfire

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8970M Crossfire with Quadro 500M, including specs and performance data.

HD 8970M Crossfire
2012
200 Watt
18.71
+1164%

HD 8970M Crossfire outperforms 500M by a whopping 1164% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking291977
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.512.94
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameNeptune CFGF108
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date1 May 2012 (12 years ago)22 February 2011 (13 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 cores256096
Core clock speed850 MHz700 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data585 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rateno data11.20
Floating-point processing powerno data0.2688 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data16

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 sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataMXM-A (3.0)

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data1 GB
Memory bus width2x 256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed4800 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data28.8 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.112 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-2.1

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:

Full HD65
+1200%
5−6
−1200%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+1333%
3−4
−1333%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+1475%
4−5
−1475%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+1400%
3−4
−1400%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+1222%
9−10
−1222%
Hitman 3 35−40
+1750%
2−3
−1750%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+1229%
7−8
−1229%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+1220%
5−6
−1220%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+1475%
4−5
−1475%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+1171%
7−8
−1171%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+1333%
3−4
−1333%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+1475%
4−5
−1475%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+1400%
3−4
−1400%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+1222%
9−10
−1222%
Hitman 3 35−40
+1750%
2−3
−1750%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+1229%
7−8
−1229%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+1220%
5−6
−1220%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+1475%
4−5
−1475%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+1333%
3−4
−1333%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+1171%
7−8
−1171%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+1333%
3−4
−1333%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+1400%
3−4
−1400%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+1222%
9−10
−1222%
Hitman 3 35−40
+1750%
2−3
−1750%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+1229%
7−8
−1229%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+1475%
4−5
−1475%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+1333%
3−4
−1333%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+1171%
7−8
−1171%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+1750%
2−3
−1750%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12 0−1
Far Cry 5 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+1213%
8−9
−1213%
Hitman 3 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+1650%
2−3
−1650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+1167%
3−4
−1167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+1167%
9−10
−1167%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Hitman 3 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+1300%
7−8
−1300%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%

This is how HD 8970M Crossfire and Quadro 500M compete in popular games:

  • HD 8970M Crossfire is 1200% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.71 1.48
Recency 1 May 2012 22 February 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 35 Watt

HD 8970M Crossfire has a 1164.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro 500M, on the other hand, has 471.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 8970M Crossfire is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 500M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8970M Crossfire is a notebook graphics card while Quadro 500M is a mobile 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.


AMD Radeon HD 8970M Crossfire
Radeon HD 8970M Crossfire
NVIDIA Quadro 500M
Quadro 500M

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.


4.8 4 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8970M Crossfire on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Quadro 500M 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.