Radeon RX 9070 GRE vs GeForce 710M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 710M with Radeon RX 9070 GRE, including specs and performance data.
9070 GRE outperforms 710M by a whopping 5273% 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 | 1152 | 48 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 60.87 |
| Power efficiency | 5.43 | 19.89 |
| Architecture | Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015) | RDNA 4.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | GK208 | Navi 48 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 24 July 2013 (12 years ago) | 8 May 2025 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $549 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 | 192 | 3072 |
| Core clock speed | 719 MHz | 1420 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 800 MHz | 2790 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 915 million | 53,900 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 220 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 11.50 | 535.7 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.2761 TFLOPS | 34.28 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 96 |
| TMUs | 16 | 192 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 96 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 48 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 768 KB |
| L1 Cache | 32 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 8 MB |
| L3 Cache | no data | 48 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).
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| Bus support | PCI Express 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 | DDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 12 GB |
| Standard memory configuration | DDR3 | no data |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 2250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | 432.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1a |
| eDP 1.2 signal support | Up to 2560x1600 | no data |
| LVDS signal support | Up to 1920x1200 | no data |
| VGA аnalog display support | Up to 2048x1536 | no data |
| DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | Up to 2560x1600 | no data |
| HDMI | + | + |
| HDCP content protection | + | - |
| 7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI | + | - |
| TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Blu-Ray 3D Support | + | - |
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | + | - |
| Optimus | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 API | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | 1.4 |
| CUDA | + | - |
| 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.
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:
| Full HD | 2−3
−7900%
| 160
+7900%
|
| 1440p | 1−2
−8400%
| 85
+8400%
|
| 4K | 1−2
−5600%
| 57
+5600%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 3.43 |
| 1440p | no data | 6.46 |
| 4K | no data | 9.63 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−6900%
|
140−150
+6900%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−6900%
|
140−150
+6900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−17300%
|
170−180
+17300%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−12800%
|
250−260
+12800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−3057%
|
220−230
+3057%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−17300%
|
170−180
+17300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−1833%
|
170−180
+1833%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−913%
|
300−350
+913%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
−969%
|
270−280
+969%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−6900%
|
140−150
+6900%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−5233%
|
800−850
+5233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−17300%
|
170−180
+17300%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−12800%
|
250−260
+12800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−3057%
|
220−230
+3057%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−17300%
|
170−180
+17300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−14200%
|
140−150
+14200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−1833%
|
170−180
+1833%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−5100%
|
364
+5100%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−913%
|
300−350
+913%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−6900%
|
140−150
+6900%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−5233%
|
800−850
+5233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−17300%
|
170−180
+17300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−3057%
|
220−230
+3057%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−1833%
|
170−180
+1833%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−2714%
|
197
+2714%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−5223%
|
1650−1700
+5223%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−12800%
|
250−260
+12800%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−5433%
|
160−170
+5433%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 6−7
−6967%
|
400−450
+6967%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−4900%
|
550−600
+4900%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−18300%
|
350−400
+18300%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 75−80 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 140−150 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−6000%
|
180−190
+6000%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−7000%
|
142
+7000%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−15000%
|
150−160
+15000%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−820%
|
130−140
+820%
|
| Valorant | 7−8
−4400%
|
300−350
+4400%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−4700%
|
95−100
+4700%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−3850%
|
75−80
+3850%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 280−290
+0%
|
280−290
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 280−290
+0%
|
280−290
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 280−290
+0%
|
280−290
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 113
+0%
|
113
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
This is how GeForce 710M and RX 9070 GRE compete in popular games:
- RX 9070 GRE is 7900% faster in 1080p
- RX 9070 GRE is 8400% faster in 1440p
- RX 9070 GRE is 5600% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 9070 GRE is 18300% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RX 9070 GRE performs better in 34 tests (65%)
- there's a draw in 18 tests (35%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.06 | 56.95 |
| Recency | 24 July 2013 | 8 May 2025 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 12 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 220 Watt |
GeForce 710M has 1367% lower power consumption.
RX 9070 GRE, on the other hand, has a 5273% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 600% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 9070 GRE is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 710M in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce 710M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX 9070 GRE 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.
