GeForce GTX 470M vs Radeon PRO W7600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO W7600 with GeForce GTX 470M, including specs and performance data.

PRO W7600
2023, $599
8 GB GDDR6, 130 Watt
39.54
+743%

PRO W7600 outperforms 470M by a whopping 743% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking127706
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation39.03no data
Power efficiency23.544.84
ArchitectureRDNA 3 (2023−2025)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameNavi 33GF104
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date3 August 2023 (3 years ago)3 September 2010 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 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 cores2048288
Core clock speed1720 MHz535 MHz
Boost clock speed2440 MHzno data
Number of transistors13.3 billion1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate312.325.68
Floating-point processing powerno data0.6163 TFLOPS
ROPs6424
TMUs12848
Ray Tracing Cores32no data
L0 Cache512 KBno data
L1 Cache512 KB384 KB
L2 Cache2 MB384 KB
L3 Cache32 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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8MXM-B (3.0)
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone
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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB1536 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed2250 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/s60.0 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 Connectors4x DisplayPort 2.1No outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 API
Shader Model6.95.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.4N/A
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.

PRO W7600 39.54
+743%
GTX 470M 4.69

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.

PRO W7600 16472
+743%
Samples: 89
GTX 470M 1953
Samples: 8

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:

900p280−290
+724%
34
−724%
Full HD400−450
+700%
50
−700%

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.50no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Valorant 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how PRO W7600 and GTX 470M compete in popular games:

  • PRO W7600 is 724% faster in 900p
  • PRO W7600 is 700% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 39.54 4.69
Recency 3 August 2023 3 September 2010
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 1536 MB
Chip lithography 6 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 75 Watt

PRO W7600 has a 743% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 433% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 567% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 470M, on the other hand, has 73% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO W7600 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 470M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon PRO W7600 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 470M 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.


4.9 8 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate GeForce GTX 470M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon PRO W7600 or GeForce GTX 470M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.