Radeon 780M vs RX 470 Mobile

Place in the ranking	299	298
Place by popularity	not in top-100	47
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	9.76	no data
Power efficiency	14.91	85.22
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Ellesmere	Hawx Point
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	4 August 2016 (8 years ago)	6 December 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$549.99	no data

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	2048	768
Core clock speed	926 MHz	800 MHz
Boost clock speed	1074 MHz	2700 MHz
Number of transistors	5,700 million	25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	85 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	137.5	129.6
Floating-point processing power	4.399 TFLOPS	8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	128	48
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	12

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 x8
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	256 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	224.0 GB/s	no data
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

Portable Device Dependent

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	6.8
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

RX 470 Mobile 18.17

Radeon 780M 18.33
+0.9%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

RX 470 Mobile 10715
+34.3%

Radeon 780M 7977

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	35−40 −2.9%	36 +2.9%
1440p	18−20 −11.1%	20 +11.1%
4K	14−16 −7.1%	15 +7.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	15.71	no data
1440p	30.56	no data
4K	39.29	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

30−33

−30%

39
+30%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +2.4%	40−45 −2.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%
Battlefield 5	60−65 +3.3%	60−65 −3.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +2.7%	35−40 −2.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 −3.3%	31 +3.3%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +2.3%	40−45 −2.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	50−55 +4.1%	45−50 −4.1%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +2.6%	110−120 −2.6%
Hitman 3	35−40 +5.7%	35−40 −5.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 +2.2%	90−95 −2.2%
Metro Exodus	65−70 +3.2%	60−65 −3.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +4.1%	45−50 −4.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	60−65 +3.3%	60−65 −3.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +2.3%	85−90 −2.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +2.4%	40−45 −2.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%
Battlefield 5	60−65 +3.3%	60−65 −3.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +2.7%	35−40 −2.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 +25%	24 −25%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +2.3%	40−45 −2.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	50−55 +4.1%	45−50 −4.1%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +2.6%	110−120 −2.6%
Hitman 3	35−40 +5.7%	35−40 −5.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 +2.2%	90−95 −2.2%
Metro Exodus	65−70 +3.2%	60−65 −3.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +4.1%	45−50 −4.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	60−65 +14.8%	54 −14.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +2.4%	40−45 −2.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +2.3%	85−90 −2.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +2.4%	40−45 −2.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +2.7%	35−40 −2.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 +30.4%	23 −30.4%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +2.3%	40−45 −2.3%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +2.6%	110−120 −2.6%
Hitman 3	35−40 +5.7%	35−40 −5.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 +73.6%	53 −73.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	60−65 +34.8%	46 −34.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +48.3%	29 −48.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +394%	18 −394%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

50−55
+4.1%

45−50

−4.1%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +2.9%	35−40 −2.9%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 +3.6%	27−30 −3.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +5%	20−22 −5%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +4.8%	21−24 −4.8%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +4%	100−105 −4%
Hitman 3	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +2.7%	35−40 −2.7%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +2.9%	30−35 −2.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +18.8%	32 −18.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +5%	20 −5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +2.7%	110−120 −2.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−35
+3.3%

30−33

−3.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +5.6%	18−20 −5.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Hitman 3	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	95−100 +3.2%	90−95 −3.2%
Metro Exodus	20−22 +5.3%	18−20 −5.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +26.7%	15 −26.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +4%	24−27 −4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +23.5%	17 −23.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18
+6.3%

16−18

−6.3%

This is how RX 470 Mobile and Radeon 780M compete in popular games:

Radeon 780M is 3% faster in 1080p
Radeon 780M is 11% faster in 1440p
Radeon 780M is 7% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 470 Mobile is 394% faster.
in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the Radeon 780M is 30% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 470 Mobile is ahead in 61 test (85%)
Radeon 780M is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
there's a draw in 9 tests (13%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	18.17	18.33
Recency	4 August 2016	6 December 2023
Chip lithography	14 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	85 Watt	15 Watt

Radeon 780M has a 0.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 466.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon RX 470 Mobile and Radeon 780M.

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