GeForce RTX 4080 vs Radeon R7 M270DX

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 M270DX with GeForce RTX 4080, including specs and performance data.

R7 M270DX
2014
2.30
RTX 4080
2022, $1,199
16 GB GDDR6X, 320 Watt
82.31
+3479%

RTX 4080 outperforms R7 M270DX by a whopping 3479% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9196
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data37.25
Power efficiencyno data20.03
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameTopazAD103
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date11 June 2014 (12 years ago)20 September 2022 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,199

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 cores3849728
Core clock speed900 MHz2205 MHz
Boost clock speed940 MHz2505 MHz
Number of transistors1,550 million45,900 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data320 Watt
Texture fill rate22.56761.5
Floating-point processing power0.7219 TFLOPS48.74 TFLOPS
ROPs8112
TMUs24304
Tensor Coresno data304
Ray Tracing Coresno data76
L1 Cache96 KB9.5 MB
L2 Cache256 KB64 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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data310 mm
Widthno data3-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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6X
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared16 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1400 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data716.8 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 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA-8.9
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.

R7 M270DX 2.30
RTX 4080 82.31
+3479%

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.

R7 M270DX 961
RTX 4080 34437
+3483%
Samples: 11532

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 HD6−7
−97.3%
221
1440p4−5
−97.4%
153
4K2−3
−98%
101

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data5.43
1440pno data7.84
4Kno data11.87

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 240−250 240−250
Counter-Strike 2 300−350 300−350
Cyberpunk 2077 231 231

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 227 227
Battlefield 5 190−200 190−200
Counter-Strike 2 320 320
Cyberpunk 2077 231 231
Far Cry 5 223 223
Fortnite 300−350 300−350
Forza Horizon 4 300−350 300−350
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 550−600 550−600

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 205 205
Battlefield 5 190−200 190−200
Counter-Strike 2 317 317
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 210 210
Dota 2 249 249
Far Cry 5 218 218
Far Cry 6 188 188
Fortnite 300−350 300−350
Forza Horizon 4 300−350 300−350
Grand Theft Auto V 178 178
Metro Exodus 213 213
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 545 545
Valorant 550−600 550−600

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 190−200 190−200
Cyberpunk 2077 190 190
Dota 2 233 233
Far Cry 5 204 204
Forza Horizon 4 300−350 300−350
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 258 258
Valorant 575 575

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 300−350 300−350

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 259 259
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550 500−550
Far Cry 6 168 168
Grand Theft Auto V 162 162
Metro Exodus 154 154
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 450−500 450−500

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 190−200 190−200
Cyberpunk 2077 129 129
Far Cry 5 201 201
Forza Horizon 4 300−350 300−350
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 191 191

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 150−160

4K
High

Atomic Heart 90−95 90−95
Counter-Strike 2 107 107
Far Cry 6 107 107
Grand Theft Auto V 185 185
Metro Exodus 104 104
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 187 187
Valorant 300−350 300−350

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140 130−140
Counter-Strike 2 120−130 120−130
Cyberpunk 2077 63 63
Dota 2 227 227
Far Cry 5 140 140
Forza Horizon 4 290−300 290−300
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 95−100

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 75−80

This is how R7 M270DX and RTX 4080 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4080 is 3583% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4080 is 3725% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 4080 is 4950% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.30 82.31
Recency 11 June 2014 20 September 2022
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm

RTX 4080 has a 3479% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 82% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4080 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M270DX in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 M270DX is a notebook graphics card while GeForce RTX 4080 is a desktop 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.


3 3 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M270DX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 5597 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4080 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 M270DX or GeForce RTX 4080, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.