Qualcomm Adreno X2-90 vs Radeon AI PRO R9700

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon AI PRO R9700 with Qualcomm Adreno X2-90, including specs and performance data.

AI PRO R9700
2025, $1,299
32 GB GDDR6, 300 Watt
65.52
+260%

AI PRO R9700 outperforms Qualcomm Adreno X2-90 by a whopping 260% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking29347
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation28.32no data
Power efficiency16.90no data
ArchitectureRDNA 4.0 (2025−2026)no data
GPU code nameNavi 48no data
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date23 July 2025 (1 year ago)29 September 2025 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,299 no data

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 cores4096no data
Core clock speed1660 MHzno data
Boost clock speed2920 MHz1850 MHz
Number of transistors53,900 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology4 nmno data
Power consumption (TDP)300 Wattno data
Texture fill rate747.5no data
Floating-point processing power47.84 TFLOPSno data
ROPs128no data
TMUs256no data
Tensor Cores128no data
Ray Tracing Cores64no data
L0 Cache1 MBno data
L2 Cache8 MBno data
L3 Cache64 MBno 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).

InterfacePCIe 5.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 16-pinno 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 typeGDDR6no data
Maximum RAM amount32 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed2518 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth644.6 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1ano data
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)no data
Shader Model6.8no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.2no data
Vulkan1.3-
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.

AI PRO R9700 65.52
+260%
Qualcomm Adreno X2-90 18.18

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.

AI PRO R9700 27297
+260%
Samples: 113
Qualcomm Adreno X2-90 7573
Samples: 74

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 HD200−210
+257%
56
−257%
1440p120−130
+233%
36
−233%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.50no data
1440p10.83no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 56
+0%
56
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 53
+0%
53
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 54
+0%
54
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 28
+0%
28
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 45
+0%
45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how AI PRO R9700 and Qualcomm Adreno X2-90 compete in popular games:

  • AI PRO R9700 is 257% faster in 1080p
  • AI PRO R9700 is 233% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 56 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 65.52 18.18
Recency 23 July 2025 29 September 2025

AI PRO R9700 has a 260% higher aggregate performance score.

Qualcomm Adreno X2-90, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 months.

The Radeon AI PRO R9700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno X2-90 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon AI PRO R9700 is a workstation graphics card while Qualcomm Adreno X2-90 is a notebook 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.


4.4 40 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 5 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno X2-90 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon AI PRO R9700 or Qualcomm Adreno X2-90, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.