RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation vs Radeon R7 (Carrizo)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 (Carrizo) with RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, including specs and performance data.

R7 (Carrizo)
2015
12 Watt
2.00

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation outperforms R7 (Carrizo) by a whopping 2628% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking88246
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.9754.20
ArchitectureGCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameCarrizoAD104
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date4 June 2015 (9 years ago)21 March 2023 (1 year 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 cores5126144
Core clock speedno data720 MHz
Boost clock speed800 MHz1560 MHz
Number of transistors2410 Million35,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12-35 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rateno data299.5
Floating-point processing powerno data19.17 TFLOPS
ROPsno data80
TMUsno data192
Tensor Coresno data192
Ray Tracing Coresno data48

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data20 GB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit160 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data280.0 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 data4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-8.9

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 HD9
−2567%
240−250
+2567%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−2400%
100−105
+2400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−2614%
190−200
+2614%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−2500%
130−140
+2500%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−2400%
100−105
+2400%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−2567%
80−85
+2567%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−2500%
130−140
+2500%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−2614%
190−200
+2614%
Hitman 3 6−7
−2567%
160−170
+2567%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−2547%
450−500
+2547%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−2400%
100−105
+2400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−2600%
270−280
+2600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−2614%
950−1000
+2614%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−2614%
190−200
+2614%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−2500%
130−140
+2500%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−2400%
100−105
+2400%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−2567%
80−85
+2567%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−2500%
130−140
+2500%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−2614%
190−200
+2614%
Hitman 3 6−7
−2567%
160−170
+2567%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−2547%
450−500
+2547%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−2400%
100−105
+2400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−2600%
270−280
+2600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
−2400%
350−400
+2400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−2614%
950−1000
+2614%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−2614%
190−200
+2614%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−2500%
130−140
+2500%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−2400%
100−105
+2400%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−2567%
80−85
+2567%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−2614%
190−200
+2614%
Hitman 3 6−7
−2567%
160−170
+2567%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−2547%
450−500
+2547%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−2600%
270−280
+2600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−2400%
300−310
+2400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−2614%
950−1000
+2614%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−2400%
100−105
+2400%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−2567%
80−85
+2567%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−2567%
80−85
+2567%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−2400%
50−55
+2400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−2400%
50−55
+2400%
Hitman 3 7−8
−2614%
190−200
+2614%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−2567%
160−170
+2567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−2627%
300−310
+2627%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−2500%
130−140
+2500%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−2400%
50−55
+2400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−2567%
80−85
+2567%

This is how R7 (Carrizo) and RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is 2567% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.00 54.56
Recency 4 June 2015 21 March 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 70 Watt

R7 (Carrizo) has 483.3% lower power consumption.

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, on the other hand, has a 2628% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 (Carrizo) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 (Carrizo) is a notebook card while RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 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.


AMD Radeon R7 (Carrizo)
Radeon R7 (Carrizo)
NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation

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.


3.4 7 votes

Rate Radeon R7 (Carrizo) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 49 votes

Rate RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 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.