GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition vs Radeon RX Vega 56

Place in the ranking	153	564
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	23.79	no data
Power efficiency	11.24	3.79
Architecture	GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	Vega 10	GK104
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	14 August 2017 (7 years ago)	8 November 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$399	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	3584	1536
Core clock speed	1156 MHz	771 MHz
Boost clock speed	1471 MHz	797 MHz
Number of transistors	12,500 million	3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	210 Watt	122 Watt
Texture fill rate	329.5	102.0
Floating-point processing power	10.54 TFLOPS	2.448 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	32
TMUs	224	128

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 8-pin	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	HBM2	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	2048 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	409.6 GB/s	160.0 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	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.1.125	1.1.126
CUDA	-	3.0

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	115 +448%	21−24 −448%
1440p	74 +429%	14−16 −429%
4K	48 +433%	9−10 −433%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.47	no data
1440p	5.39	no data
4K	8.31	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	65−70 +475%	12−14 −475%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +414%	14−16 −414%
Elden Ring	110−120 +462%	21−24 −462%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	88 +450%	16−18 −450%
Counter-Strike 2	65−70 +475%	12−14 −475%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +414%	14−16 −414%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +437%	30−33 −437%
Metro Exodus	96 +433%	18−20 −433%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +475%	12−14 −475%
Valorant	130−140 +471%	24−27 −471%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	156 +420%	30−33 −420%
Counter-Strike 2	65−70 +475%	12−14 −475%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +414%	14−16 −414%
Dota 2	63 +425%	12−14 −425%
Elden Ring	110−120 +462%	21−24 −462%
Far Cry 5	90−95 +469%	16−18 −469%
Fortnite	140 +419%	27−30 −419%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +437%	30−33 −437%
Grand Theft Auto V	94 +422%	18−20 −422%
Metro Exodus	73 +421%	14−16 −421%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 +440%	35−40 −440%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +475%	12−14 −475%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	110−120 +462%	21−24 −462%
Valorant	130−140 +471%	24−27 −471%
World of Tanks	270−280 +456%	50−55 −456%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	80 +471%	14−16 −471%
Counter-Strike 2	65−70 +475%	12−14 −475%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +414%	14−16 −414%
Dota 2	110−120 +429%	21−24 −429%
Far Cry 5	90−95 +469%	16−18 −469%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +437%	30−33 −437%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	112 +433%	21−24 −433%
Valorant	130−140 +471%	24−27 −471%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	60−65 +417%	12−14 −417%
Elden Ring	65−70 +458%	12−14 −458%
Grand Theft Auto V	60−65 +417%	12−14 −417%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +483%	30−33 −483%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 +450%	6−7 −450%
World of Tanks	210−220 +448%	40−45 −448%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	67 +458%	12−14 −458%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +433%	6−7 −433%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +450%	6−7 −450%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +419%	21−24 −419%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 +433%	18−20 −433%
Metro Exodus	74 +429%	14−16 −429%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60 +460%	10−11 −460%
Valorant	100−110 +467%	18−20 −467%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +467%	6−7 −467%
Dota 2	50 +456%	9−10 −456%
Elden Ring	30−35 +417%	6−7 −417%
Grand Theft Auto V	50 +456%	9−10 −456%
Metro Exodus	27 +440%	5−6 −440%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 +419%	21−24 −419%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +450%	4−5 −450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50 +456%	9−10 −456%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35 +483%	6−7 −483%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +467%	6−7 −467%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Dota 2	65−70 +442%	12−14 −442%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +444%	9−10 −444%
Fortnite	45−50 +411%	9−10 −411%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +450%	10−11 −450%
Valorant	50−55 +420%	10−11 −420%

This is how RX Vega 56 and GTX 780M Mac Edition compete in popular games:

RX Vega 56 is 448% faster in 1080p
RX Vega 56 is 429% faster in 1440p
RX Vega 56 is 433% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	34.28	6.72
Recency	14 August 2017	8 November 2013
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	210 Watt	122 Watt

RX Vega 56 has a 410.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 780M Mac Edition, on the other hand, has 72.1% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 56 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 56 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition is a notebook one.

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