Radeon 820M vs GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile and Radeon 820M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RTX 3070 Mobile outperforms 820M by a whopping 2557% 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 | 158 | 1048 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 22.71 | no data |
| Architecture | Ampere (2020−2025) | RDNA 3+ (2024) |
| GPU code name | GA104 | Krackan Point |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 12 January 2021 (4 years ago) | 2 June 2024 (1 year 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 cores | 5120 | 128 |
| Core clock speed | 1110 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1560 MHz | 2900 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 17,400 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 8 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 249.6 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 15.97 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 80 | no data |
| TMUs | 160 | no data |
| Tensor Cores | 160 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 40 | no 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 size | large | medium sized |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | no data |
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 | GDDR6 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 7500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 448.0 GB/s | no data |
| 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 | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | no data |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | - |
| CUDA | 8.6 | - |
| DLSS | + | - |
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 | 112
+2700%
| 4−5
−2700%
|
| 1440p | 70
+3400%
| 2−3
−3400%
|
| 4K | 45
+4400%
| 1−2
−4400%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 241
+2578%
|
9−10
−2578%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 119
+3867%
|
3−4
−3867%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 80
+2567%
|
3−4
−2567%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+6050%
|
2−3
−6050%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 230
+2775%
|
8−9
−2775%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 107
+3467%
|
3−4
−3467%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 119
+3867%
|
3−4
−3867%
|
| Fortnite | 150−160
+3750%
|
4−5
−3750%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 189
+2263%
|
8−9
−2263%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 144
+14300%
|
1−2
−14300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+1444%
|
9−10
−1444%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 76
+3700%
|
2−3
−3700%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+536%
|
30−35
−536%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 134
+6600%
|
2−3
−6600%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 172
+2767%
|
6−7
−2767%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+827%
|
30−33
−827%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 88
+2833%
|
3−4
−2833%
|
| Dota 2 | 130
+3150%
|
4−5
−3150%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 114
+3700%
|
3−4
−3700%
|
| Fortnite | 150−160
+3750%
|
4−5
−3750%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 188
+2250%
|
8−9
−2250%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 132
+13100%
|
1−2
−13100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 125
+12400%
|
1−2
−12400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 97
+4750%
|
2−3
−4750%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+1444%
|
9−10
−1444%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 73
+3550%
|
2−3
−3550%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 170
+2329%
|
7−8
−2329%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+536%
|
30−35
−536%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 126
+6200%
|
2−3
−6200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 74
+2367%
|
3−4
−2367%
|
| Dota 2 | 120
+2900%
|
4−5
−2900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 107
+3467%
|
3−4
−3467%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 167
+1988%
|
8−9
−1988%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+1444%
|
9−10
−1444%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 67
+3250%
|
2−3
−3250%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 94
+1243%
|
7−8
−1243%
|
| Valorant | 183
+2950%
|
6−7
−2950%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 150−160
+3750%
|
4−5
−3750%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 106
+5200%
|
2−3
−5200%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 240−250
+2913%
|
8−9
−2913%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 83
+2667%
|
3−4
−2667%
|
| Metro Exodus | 59
+2850%
|
2−3
−2850%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+2817%
|
6−7
−2817%
|
| Valorant | 254
+4980%
|
5−6
−4980%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 102
+3300%
|
3−4
−3300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 47 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 91 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 140
+4567%
|
3−4
−4567%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 54
+2600%
|
2−3
−2600%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 60−65
+6200%
|
1−2
−6200%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 90−95
+4400%
|
2−3
−4400%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 32
+3100%
|
1−2
−3100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 83
+453%
|
14−16
−453%
|
| Metro Exodus | 37
+3600%
|
1−2
−3600%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 64
+3100%
|
2−3
−3100%
|
| Valorant | 238
+3300%
|
7−8
−3300%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 63
+3050%
|
2−3
−3050%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+3800%
|
1−2
−3800%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 22 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 109
+2625%
|
4−5
−2625%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 51
+5000%
|
1−2
−5000%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 93
+3000%
|
3−4
−3000%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+2100%
|
2−3
−2100%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 35
+3400%
|
1−2
−3400%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 40−45
+2050%
|
2−3
−2050%
|
This is how RTX 3070 Mobile and Radeon 820M compete in popular games:
- RTX 3070 Mobile is 2700% faster in 1080p
- RTX 3070 Mobile is 3400% faster in 1440p
- RTX 3070 Mobile is 4400% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RTX 3070 Mobile is 14300% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RTX 3070 Mobile surpassed Radeon 820M in all 38 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 34.28 | 1.29 |
| Recency | 12 January 2021 | 2 June 2024 |
| Chip lithography | 8 nm | 4 nm |
RTX 3070 Mobile has a 2557.4% higher aggregate performance score.
Radeon 820M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 820M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
