Radeon HD 8570M vs GeForce GTX 460M SLI

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 460M SLI and Radeon HD 8570M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 460M SLI
2010
2x1536 MB GDDR5
4.52
+326%

460M SLI outperforms HD 8570M by a whopping 326% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6941131
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameN11E-GSSun
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date3 September 2010 (15 years ago)1 March 2013 (12 years ago)

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 cores384320
Core clock speed675 MHz750 MHz
Boost clock speedno data825 MHz
Number of transistorsno data690 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Texture fill rateno data16.50
Floating-point processing powerno data0.528 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data20
L1 Cacheno data80 KB
L2 Cacheno data128 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 sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x8

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2x1536 MB1 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data16 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX1112 (11_1)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
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.

GTX 460M SLI 4.52
+326%
HD 8570M 1.06

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 460M SLI 3313
+164%
HD 8570M 1255

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 460M SLI 14236
+226%
HD 8570M 4365

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:

900p52
+333%
12−14
−333%
Full HD67
+509%
11
−509%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 18−20 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Fortnite 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+214%
7−8
−214%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Valorant 55−60
+84.4%
30−35
−84.4%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 18−20 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 80−85
+208%
24−27
−208%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Dota 2 40−45
+167%
14−16
−167%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Fortnite 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+214%
7−8
−214%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Valorant 55−60
+84.4%
30−35
−84.4%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Dota 2 40−45
+167%
14−16
−167%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+214%
7−8
−214%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Valorant 55−60
+84.4%
30−35
−84.4%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+400%
7−8
−400%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4 0−1
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+209%
10−12
−209%
Valorant 50−55
+2400%
2−3
−2400%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Valorant 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 16−18 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

This is how GTX 460M SLI and HD 8570M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 460M SLI is 333% faster in 900p
  • GTX 460M SLI is 509% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Valorant, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 460M SLI is 2400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 460M SLI surpassed HD 8570M in all 44 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.52 1.06
Recency 3 September 2010 1 March 2013
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm

GTX 460M SLI has a 326.4% higher aggregate performance score.

HD 8570M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 460M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8570M in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M SLI
GeForce GTX 460M SLI
AMD Radeon HD 8570M
Radeon HD 8570M

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate GeForce GTX 460M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 99 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8570M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 460M SLI or Radeon HD 8570M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.