Radeon AI PRO R9700 vs GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile with Radeon AI PRO R9700, including specs and performance data.

RTX 3070 Mobile
2021
8 GB GDDR6, 125 Watt
34.33
AI PRO R9700
2025, $1,299
32 GB GDDR6, 300 Watt
65.29
+90.2%

AI PRO R9700 outperforms RTX 3070 Mobile by an impressive 90% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking16929
Place by popularity95not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data28.34
Power efficiency23.2516.95
ArchitectureAmpere (2020−2025)RDNA 4.0 (2025−2026)
GPU code nameGA104Navi 48
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date12 January 2021 (5 years ago)23 July 2025 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores51204096
Core clock speed1110 MHz1660 MHz
Boost clock speed1560 MHz2920 MHz
Number of transistors17,400 million53,900 million
Manufacturing process technology8 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate249.6747.5
Floating-point processing power15.97 TFLOPS47.84 TFLOPS
ROPs80128
TMUs160256
Tensor Cores160128
Ray Tracing Cores4064
L0 Cacheno data1 MB
L1 Cache5 MBno data
L2 Cache4 MB8 MB
L3 Cacheno data64 MB

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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 5.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 16-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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB32 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz2518 MHz
Memory bandwidth448.0 GB/s644.6 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR++

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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1a
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.2
Vulkan1.21.3
CUDA8.6-
DLSS++

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

RTX 3070 Mobile 34.33
AI PRO R9700 65.29
+90.2%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

RTX 3070 Mobile 14364
Samples: 9107
AI PRO R9700 27314
+90.2%
Samples: 120

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 HD109200−210
+83.5%
1440p68
−43.3%
120−130
4K4480−85
+81.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data6.50
1440pno data10.83
4Kno data16.24

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 187 350−400
+87.2%
Counter-Strike 2 241 450−500
+86.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 119 220−230
+84.9%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 140 260−270
+85.7%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 144 270−280
+87.5%
Battlefield 5 120−130 230−240
+85.5%
Counter-Strike 2 230 400−450
+73.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 107 200−210
+86.9%
Far Cry 5 119 220−230
+84.9%
Fortnite 150−160 290−300
+87.1%
Forza Horizon 4 189 350−400
+85.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150 260−270
+85.7%
Valorant 210−220 400−450
+86.9%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 89 160−170
+79.8%
Battlefield 5 134 250−260
+86.6%
Counter-Strike 2 172 300−310
+74.4%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 500−550
+79.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 88 160−170
+81.8%
Dota 2 130 240−250
+84.6%
Far Cry 5 114 210−220
+84.2%
Fortnite 150−160 290−300
+87.1%
Forza Horizon 4 188 350−400
+86.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 125 230−240
+84%
Metro Exodus 97 180−190
+85.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150 260−270
+85.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 170 300−310
+76.5%
Valorant 210−220 400−450
+86.9%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 126 230−240
+82.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 74 140−150
+89.2%
Dota 2 120 220−230
+83.3%
Far Cry 5 107 200−210
+86.9%
Forza Horizon 4 167 300−310
+79.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150 260−270
+85.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 94 170−180
+80.9%
Valorant 183 300−310
+63.9%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 290−300
+87.1%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 106 200−210
+88.7%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250 450−500
+84.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 83 150−160
+80.7%
Metro Exodus 59 110−120
+86.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 300−310
+71.4%
Valorant 254 450−500
+77.2%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 102 190−200
+86.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 47 85−90
+80.9%
Far Cry 5 91 170−180
+86.8%
Forza Horizon 4 140 260−270
+85.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65 120−130
+87.5%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 90−95 170−180
+86.8%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 27−30 50−55
+78.6%
Counter-Strike 2 32 60−65
+87.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 83 150−160
+80.7%
Metro Exodus 37 70−75
+89.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 64 120−130
+87.5%
Valorant 238 450−500
+89.1%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 63 110−120
+74.6%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 70−75
+79.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 22 40−45
+81.8%
Dota 2 109 200−210
+83.5%
Far Cry 5 51 95−100
+86.3%
Forza Horizon 4 93 170−180
+82.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45 80−85
+81.8%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 40−45 80−85
+81.8%

This is how RTX 3070 Mobile and AI PRO R9700 compete in popular games:

  • AI PRO R9700 is 83% faster in 1080p
  • AI PRO R9700 is 76% faster in 1440p
  • AI PRO R9700 is 82% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 34.33 65.29
Recency 12 January 2021 23 July 2025
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 8 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 300 Watt

RTX 3070 Mobile has 58% lower power consumption.

AI PRO R9700, on the other hand, has a 90% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 50% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon AI PRO R9700 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile is a notebook graphics card while Radeon AI PRO R9700 is a workstation one.

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.


4.2 2353 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 40 votes

Rate Radeon AI PRO R9700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile or Radeon AI PRO R9700, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.