GeForce GTX 970M vs Radeon HD 7990
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 7990 with GeForce GTX 970M, including specs and performance data.
970M outperforms HD 7990 by a minimal 3% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 424 | 420 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.35 | 0.55 |
| Power efficiency | 2.76 | 13.11 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019) |
| GPU code name | Malta | GM204 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 24 April 2013 (13 years ago) | 7 October 2014 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $999 | $2,560.89 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
HD 7990 has 145% better value for money than GTX 970M.
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 cores | 2048 ×2 | 1280 |
| Core clock speed | 950 MHz | 924 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1038 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4,313 million | 5,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 375 Watt | unknown |
| Texture fill rate | 128.0 ×2 | 83.04 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.096 TFLOPS ×2 | 2.657 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 ×2 | 48 |
| TMUs | 128 ×2 | 80 |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB | 480 KB |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB | 1536 KB |
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 | no data | large |
| Bus support | no data | PCI Express 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Length | 307 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 8-pin | None |
| SLI options | - | + |
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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB ×2 | 3 GB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit ×2 | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz | 2500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s ×2 | 120 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 Connectors | 1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
| VGA аnalog display support | no data | + |
| DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | no data | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| G-SYNC support | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| GameStream | - | + |
| GeForce ShadowPlay | - | + |
| GPU Boost | no data | 2.0 |
| GameWorks | - | + |
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | - | + |
| Optimus | - | + |
| BatteryBoost | - | + |
| Ansel | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | - | + |
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.
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.
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.
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:
| 900p | 130−140
−4.6%
| 136
+4.6%
|
| Full HD | 55−60
−5.5%
| 58
+5.5%
|
| 1440p | 24−27
−12.5%
| 27
+12.5%
|
| 4K | 18−21
−16.7%
| 21
+16.7%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 18.16
+143%
| 44.15
−143%
|
| 1440p | 41.63
+128%
| 94.85
−128%
|
| 4K | 55.50
+120%
| 121.95
−120%
|
- HD 7990 has 143% lower cost per frame in 1080p
- HD 7990 has 128% lower cost per frame in 1440p
- HD 7990 has 120% lower cost per frame in 4K
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 66
+0%
|
66
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 46
+0%
|
46
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 163
+0%
|
163
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 61
+0%
|
61
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60
+0%
|
60
+0%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 54
+0%
|
54
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 43
+0%
|
43
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 65
+0%
|
65
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 53
+0%
|
53
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 49
+0%
|
49
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24
+0%
|
24
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 49
+0%
|
49
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 45
+0%
|
45
+0%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 49
+0%
|
49
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 39
+0%
|
39
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 36
+0%
|
36
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 33
+0%
|
33
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 26
+0%
|
26
+0%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 49
+0%
|
49
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14
+0%
|
14
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 33
+0%
|
33
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27
+0%
|
27
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 23
+0%
|
23
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 31
+0%
|
31
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 33
+0%
|
33
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7
+0%
|
7
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16
+0%
|
16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 15
+0%
|
15
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 13
+0%
|
13
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6
+0%
|
6
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12
+0%
|
12
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 14
+0%
|
14
+0%
|
This is how HD 7990 and GTX 970M compete in popular games:
- GTX 970M is 5% faster in 900p
- GTX 970M is 5% faster in 1080p
- GTX 970M is 13% faster in 1440p
- GTX 970M is 17% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 13.36 | 13.73 |
| Recency | 24 April 2013 | 7 October 2014 |
GTX 970M has a 3% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon HD 7990 and GeForce GTX 970M.
Be aware that Radeon HD 7990 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce GTX 970M 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.
