Radeon RX 7800 XT vs RTX A4500 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared RTX A4500 Mobile with Radeon RX 7800 XT, including specs and performance data.
RX 7800 XT outperforms RTX A4500 Mobile by a considerable 46% 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 | 118 | 45 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 66 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 67.41 |
| Power efficiency | 21.56 | 16.72 |
| Architecture | Ampere (2020−2025) | RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025) |
| GPU code name | GA104 | Navi 32 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 22 March 2022 (3 years ago) | 25 August 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $499 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 5888 | 3840 |
| Core clock speed | 930 MHz | 1295 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1500 MHz | 2430 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 17,400 million | 28,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 8 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 140 Watt | 263 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 276.0 | 583.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | 17.66 TFLOPS | 37.32 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 96 | 96 |
| TMUs | 184 | 240 |
| Tensor Cores | 184 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 46 | 60 |
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 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 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 | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz | 2438 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 624.1 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 | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| CUDA | 8.6 | - |
| DLSS | + | - |
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.
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.
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 | 140−150
−52.9%
| 214
+52.9%
|
| 1440p | 80−85
−53.8%
| 123
+53.8%
|
| 4K | 45−50
−60%
| 72
+60%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 2.33 |
| 1440p | no data | 4.06 |
| 4K | no data | 6.93 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 210−220
−60.3%
|
351
+60.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 90−95
−164%
|
248
+164%
|
| God of War | 95−100
−130%
|
225
+130%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
−22.2%
|
160−170
+22.2%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 210−220
−62.1%
|
355
+62.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 90−95
−109%
|
196
+109%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 120−130
−60.6%
|
204
+60.6%
|
| Fortnite | 170−180
−57.6%
|
270−280
+57.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 150−160
−80.5%
|
278
+80.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 120−130
−121%
|
276
+121%
|
| God of War | 95−100
−132%
|
227
+132%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 150−160
−12.2%
|
170−180
+12.2%
|
| Valorant | 230−240
−39%
|
300−350
+39%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
−22.2%
|
160−170
+22.2%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 210−220
−29.2%
|
283
+29.2%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+0%
|
270−280
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 90−95
−73.4%
|
163
+73.4%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
−44.8%
|
210−220
+44.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 120−130
−54.3%
|
196
+54.3%
|
| Fortnite | 170−180
−57.6%
|
270−280
+57.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 150−160
−69.5%
|
261
+69.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 120−130
−105%
|
256
+105%
|
| God of War | 95−100
−89.8%
|
186
+89.8%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 130−140
−35.9%
|
178
+35.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 95−100
−79.2%
|
172
+79.2%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 150−160
−12.2%
|
170−180
+12.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 140−150
−156%
|
366
+156%
|
| Valorant | 230−240
−39%
|
300−350
+39%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
−22.2%
|
160−170
+22.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 90−95
−59.6%
|
150
+59.6%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
−44.8%
|
210−220
+44.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 120−130
−43.3%
|
182
+43.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 150−160
−44.2%
|
222
+44.2%
|
| God of War | 95−100
−26.5%
|
124
+26.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 150−160
−12.2%
|
170−180
+12.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 140−150
−39.9%
|
200
+39.9%
|
| Valorant | 230−240
−39%
|
300−350
+39%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 170−180
−57.6%
|
270−280
+57.6%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 100−110
−71.6%
|
175
+71.6%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
−55.9%
|
400−450
+55.9%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 80−85
−70.7%
|
140
+70.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55−60
−79.7%
|
106
+79.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Valorant | 260−270
−43.1%
|
350−400
+43.1%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110
−40.2%
|
140−150
+40.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 45−50
−111%
|
99
+111%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
−81.4%
|
176
+81.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
−75.7%
|
202
+75.7%
|
| God of War | 50−55
−94.3%
|
103
+94.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 75−80
−90.9%
|
147
+90.9%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 100−110
−42.5%
|
150−160
+42.5%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+11.9%
|
42
−11.9%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 85−90
−74.7%
|
152
+74.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
−70.3%
|
63
+70.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 60−65
−84.4%
|
118
+84.4%
|
| Valorant | 240−250
−32.1%
|
300−350
+32.1%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
−59.4%
|
100−110
+59.4%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
−61.7%
|
75−80
+61.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
−105%
|
45
+105%
|
| Dota 2 | 110−120
−41.6%
|
160−170
+41.6%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
−96.2%
|
104
+96.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 75−80
−113%
|
164
+113%
|
| God of War | 35−40
−94.3%
|
68
+94.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
−74.5%
|
95−100
+74.5%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 50−55
−49.1%
|
75−80
+49.1%
|
This is how RTX A4500 Mobile and RX 7800 XT compete in popular games:
- RX 7800 XT is 53% faster in 1080p
- RX 7800 XT is 54% faster in 1440p
- RX 7800 XT is 60% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RTX A4500 Mobile is 12% faster.
- in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RX 7800 XT is 164% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX A4500 Mobile performs better in 1 test (2%)
- RX 7800 XT performs better in 59 tests (95%)
- there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 39.62 | 57.72 |
| Recency | 22 March 2022 | 25 August 2023 |
| Chip lithography | 8 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 140 Watt | 263 Watt |
RTX A4500 Mobile has 87.9% lower power consumption.
RX 7800 XT, on the other hand, has a 45.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 60% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 7800 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the RTX A4500 Mobile in performance tests.
Be aware that RTX A4500 Mobile is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 7800 XT 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.
