Radeon RX 7700 XT vs GeForce 305M

Place in the ranking	1262	39
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	70.44
Power efficiency	1.92	16.44
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GT218	Navi 32
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	10 January 2010 (15 years ago)	25 August 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$449

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores	16	3456
Core clock speed	525 MHz	1435 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2544 MHz
Number of transistors	260 million	28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	14 Watt	245 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.200	549.5
Floating-point processing power	0.0368 TFLOPS	35.17 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	55	no data
ROPs	4	96
TMUs	8	216
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	54

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).

Bus support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	2x 8-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 type	GDDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	Up to 512 MB	12 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	Up to 700 (DDR3), Up to 700 (GDDR3) MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	11.2 GB/s	432.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	DisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI	1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power management

8.0

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.1	6.7
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	+	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce 305M 0.39

RX 7700 XT 58.51
+14903%

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.

GeForce 305M 150

RX 7700 XT 22496
+14897%

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 HD	1−2 −18700%	188 +18700%
1440p	0−1	103
4K	-0−1	60

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.39
1440p	no data	4.36
4K	no data	7.48

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −2100%	176 +2100%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −9550%	193 +9550%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −1713%	145 +1713%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −3850%	79 +3850%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −6533%	398 +6533%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −2575%	100−110 +2575%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −1413%	121 +1413%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −3200%	66 +3200%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −1329%	100 +1329%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −5467%	334 +5467%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 −2971%	210−220 +2971%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −2575%	100−110 +2575%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −3380%	170−180 +3380%
World of Tanks	14−16 −1893%	270−280 +1893%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −1275%	110 +1275%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −2950%	61 +2950%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −1571%	110−120 +1571%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −4683%	287 +4683%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 −2971%	210−220 +2971%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

2−3

−8650%

170−180
+8650%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −711%	73 +711%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1900%	40 +1900%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −3900%	160−170 +3900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −5900%	120 +5900%
Valorant	5−6 −4420%	220−230 +4420%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 −647%	112 +647%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −647%	112 +647%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	1−2 −20600%	200−210 +20600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −647%	112 +647%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	70−75
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1700%	18 +1700%
Dota 2	14−16 −14900%	2250−2300 +14900%
Valorant	1−2 −12600%	120−130 +12600%

Full HD
Low Preset

Elden Ring

192

+0%

192

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Metro Exodus	157 +0%	157 +0%
Valorant	260−270 +0%	260−270 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Dota 2	166 +0%	166 +0%
Elden Ring	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%
Fortnite	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	166 +0%	166 +0%
Metro Exodus	132 +0%	132 +0%
Valorant	260−270 +0%	260−270 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Valorant	260−270 +0%	260−270 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	105 +0%	105 +0%
Elden Ring	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	105 +0%	105 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
World of Tanks	350−400 +0%	350−400 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	193 +0%	193 +0%
Metro Exodus	134 +0%	134 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	31 +0%	31 +0%
Elden Ring	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Metro Exodus	57 +0%	57 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Fortnite	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	97 +0%	97 +0%

This is how GeForce 305M and RX 7700 XT compete in popular games:

RX 7700 XT is 18700% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 7700 XT is 20600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 7700 XT is ahead in 31 test (52%)
there's a draw in 29 tests (48%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.39	58.51
Recency	10 January 2010	25 August 2023
Chip lithography	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	14 Watt	245 Watt

GeForce 305M has 1650% lower power consumption.

RX 7700 XT, on the other hand, has a 14902.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7700 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 305M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 305M is a notebook card while Radeon RX 7700 XT is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.