Radeon PRO W7700 vs RX 460 Mobile

Place in the ranking	441	61
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	56.20
Power efficiency	12.95	18.28
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Baffin	Navi 32
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	8 August 2016 (8 years ago)	13 November 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$86	$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	896	3072
Core clock speed	1000 MHz	1900 MHz
Boost clock speed	1180 MHz	2600 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	66.08	499.2
Floating-point processing power	2.115 TFLOPS	31.95 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	96
TMUs	56	192
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	48

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	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	241 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 8-pin

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1250 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80 GB/s	576.0 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 Connectors

No outputs

4x DisplayPort 2.1

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

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

−371%

160−170
+371%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

2.53

6.24

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

16−18

−369%

75−80
+369%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 −358%	110−120 +358%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 −367%	70−75 +367%
Battlefield 5	30−35 −369%	150−160 +369%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 −375%	95−100 +375%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −369%	75−80 +369%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −378%	110−120 +378%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 −364%	130−140 +364%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −348%	300−310 +348%
Hitman 3	18−20 −374%	90−95 +374%
Horizon Zero Dawn	55−60 −373%	260−270 +373%
Metro Exodus	30−35 −369%	150−160 +369%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 −364%	130−140 +364%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 −385%	160−170 +385%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 −376%	300−310 +376%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 −358%	110−120 +358%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 −367%	70−75 +367%
Battlefield 5	30−35 −369%	150−160 +369%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 −375%	95−100 +375%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −369%	75−80 +369%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −378%	110−120 +378%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 −364%	130−140 +364%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −348%	300−310 +348%
Hitman 3	18−20 −374%	90−95 +374%
Horizon Zero Dawn	55−60 −373%	260−270 +373%
Metro Exodus	30−35 −369%	150−160 +369%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 −364%	130−140 +364%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 −385%	160−170 +385%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −381%	130−140 +381%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 −376%	300−310 +376%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 −358%	110−120 +358%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 −367%	70−75 +367%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 −375%	95−100 +375%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −369%	75−80 +369%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −378%	110−120 +378%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −348%	300−310 +348%
Hitman 3	18−20 −374%	90−95 +374%
Horizon Zero Dawn	55−60 −373%	260−270 +373%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 −385%	160−170 +385%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	17 −371%	80−85 +371%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 −376%	300−310 +376%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

27−30
−364%

130−140

+364%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	20−22 −375%	95−100 +375%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 −367%	70−75 +367%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 −350%	45−50 +350%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 −350%	27−30 +350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 −350%	45−50 +350%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −380%	24−27 +380%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −358%	55−60 +358%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −367%	210−220 +367%
Hitman 3	12−14 −362%	60−65 +362%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −376%	100−105 +376%
Metro Exodus	14−16 −367%	70−75 +367%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −362%	60−65 +362%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −350%	45−50 +350%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 −369%	300−310 +369%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18

−371%

80−85
+371%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 −344%	40−45 +344%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 −329%	30−33 +329%
Hitman 3	6−7 −350%	27−30 +350%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 −377%	210−220 +377%
Metro Exodus	8−9 −338%	35−40 +338%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 −338%	35−40 +338%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −350%	27−30 +350%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −350%	18−20 +350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −380%	24−27 +380%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −380%	24−27 +380%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −362%	60−65 +362%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −329%	30−33 +329%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −350%	18−20 +350%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11

−350%

45−50
+350%

This is how RX 460 Mobile and PRO W7700 compete in popular games:

PRO W7700 is 371% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	10.22	49.84
Recency	8 August 2016	13 November 2023
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	190 Watt

RX 460 Mobile has 245.5% lower power consumption.

PRO W7700, on the other hand, has a 387.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 460 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 460 Mobile is a notebook card while Radeon PRO W7700 is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.