Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870 vs R9 M485X
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R9 M485X and Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
M GL / 870 outperforms R9 M485X by a substantial 39% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 524 | 434 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.80 | 15.01 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) | Vega (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | Amethyst | Vega Kaby Lake-G |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 May 2016 (9 years ago) | 7 January 2018 (8 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 | 2048 | 1280 |
| Core clock speed | 723 MHz | 931 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1011 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,000 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 92.54 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.961 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 32 | no data |
| TMUs | 128 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | no data |
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 | medium sized |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
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 | GDDR5 | HBM2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12_1 |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | - |
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 | 30−35
−43.3%
| 43
+43.3%
|
| 1440p | 18−21
−55.6%
| 28
+55.6%
|
| 4K | 10−12
−40%
| 14
+40%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
−44.9%
|
70−75
+44.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
−42.1%
|
27−30
+42.1%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 16−18
−52.9%
|
24−27
+52.9%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
−51.2%
|
62
+51.2%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
−44.9%
|
70−75
+44.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
−42.1%
|
27−30
+42.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−33
−40%
|
42
+40%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
−53.6%
|
86
+53.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
−35%
|
50−55
+35%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
−42.9%
|
40−45
+42.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−42.4%
|
45−50
+42.4%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
−24.4%
|
110−120
+24.4%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
−26.8%
|
52
+26.8%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
−44.9%
|
70−75
+44.9%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 140−150
−27.7%
|
180−190
+27.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
−42.1%
|
27−30
+42.1%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
−26.9%
|
85−90
+26.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−33
−30%
|
39
+30%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+0%
|
56
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
−35%
|
50−55
+35%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
−42.9%
|
40−45
+42.9%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
−20.6%
|
41
+20.6%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
−33.3%
|
24
+33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−42.4%
|
45−50
+42.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
−70.8%
|
41
+70.8%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
−24.4%
|
110−120
+24.4%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
−17.1%
|
48
+17.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
−42.1%
|
27−30
+42.1%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
−26.9%
|
85−90
+26.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−33
−20%
|
36
+20%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
−35%
|
50−55
+35%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−42.4%
|
45−50
+42.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+0%
|
24
+0%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
−24.4%
|
110−120
+24.4%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 55−60
+47.4%
|
38
−47.4%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
−41.2%
|
24−27
+41.2%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 70−75
−37.1%
|
95−100
+37.1%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
−66.7%
|
20−22
+66.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−11
−40%
|
14
+40%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
−29.2%
|
62
+29.2%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
−33.3%
|
130−140
+33.3%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
−54.5%
|
34
+54.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
−57.1%
|
10−12
+57.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
−26.3%
|
24
+26.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−40.9%
|
30−35
+40.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 18−20
−26.3%
|
24
+26.3%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
−45%
|
29
+45%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
−40%
|
14
+40%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
−45.8%
|
70−75
+45.8%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
−45.5%
|
16
+45.5%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
−38.2%
|
45−50
+38.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12
+33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
−46.7%
|
21−24
+46.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 9−10
+0%
|
9
+0%
|
This is how R9 M485X and RX Vega M GL / 870 compete in popular games:
- RX Vega M GL / 870 is 43% faster in 1080p
- RX Vega M GL / 870 is 56% faster in 1440p
- RX Vega M GL / 870 is 40% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Epic Preset, the R9 M485X is 47% faster.
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega M GL / 870 is 125% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- R9 M485X performs better in 1 test (2%)
- RX Vega M GL / 870 performs better in 56 tests (93%)
- there's a draw in 3 tests (5%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.09 | 12.67 |
| Recency | 15 May 2016 | 7 January 2018 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 65 Watt |
R9 M485X has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
RX Vega M GL / 870, on the other hand, has a 39% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 285% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M485X in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
