RTX A4500 Mobile vs Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition with RTX A4500 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

R9 M295X Mac Edition
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
13.43

RTX A4500 Mobile outperforms R9 M295X Mac Edition by a whopping 234% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking39382
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.6821.98
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameAmethystGA104
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date23 November 2014 (10 years ago)22 March 2022 (2 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 cores20485888
Core clock speed850 MHz930 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1500 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million17,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt140 Watt
Texture fill rate108.8276.0
Floating-point processing power3.482 TFLOPS17.66 TFLOPS
ROPs3296
TMUs128184
Tensor Coresno data184
Ray Tracing Coresno data46

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x16

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1362 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth174.3 GB/s512.0 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 outputsPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA-8.6
DLSS-+

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Dota 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Dota 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 280−290
+0%
280−290
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Dota 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.43 44.89
Recency 23 November 2014 22 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 140 Watt

RTX A4500 Mobile has a 234.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 78.6% lower power consumption.

The RTX A4500 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition is a notebook graphics card while RTX A4500 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

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 R9 M295X Mac Edition
Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition
NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile
RTX A4500

Other comparisons

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.


2.8 6 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 17 votes

Rate RTX A4500 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition or RTX A4500 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.