GeForce RTX 5070 vs Radeon HD 7520G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 7520G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics with GeForce RTX 5070, including specs and performance data.
RTX 5070 outperforms HD 7520G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics by a whopping 4404% 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 | 980 | 21 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 48 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 72.57 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 20.53 |
| Architecture | Terascale 3 (2010−2013) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | no data | GB205 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 15 May 2012 (12 years ago) | 4 March 2025 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $549 |
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 | 736 | 6144 |
| Core clock speed | 655 / 600 MHz | 2325 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2512 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 31,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 250 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 482.3 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 30.87 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 80 |
| TMUs | no data | 192 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 192 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 48 |
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 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 245 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 16-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 | no data | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 672.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 | no data | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.4 |
| CUDA | - | 10.1 |
| 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.
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.
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.
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:
| 900p | 23
−4248%
| 1000−1050
+4248%
|
| Full HD | 17
−1188%
| 219
+1188%
|
| 1440p | 2−3
−6250%
| 127
+6250%
|
| 4K | 1−2
−8000%
| 81
+8000%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 2.51 |
| 1440p | no data | 4.32 |
| 4K | no data | 6.78 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Baldur's Gate 3 | 5−6
−5520%
|
281
+5520%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−5767%
|
170−180
+5767%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Baldur's Gate 3 | 5−6
−4340%
|
222
+4340%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
−5967%
|
180−190
+5967%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−5767%
|
170−180
+5767%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−10633%
|
322
+10633%
|
| Fortnite | 5−6
−5940%
|
300−350
+5940%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−3388%
|
270−280
+3388%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−16350%
|
329
+16350%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−1660%
|
170−180
+1660%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−1022%
|
400−450
+1022%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Baldur's Gate 3 | 5−6
−3780%
|
194
+3780%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
−5967%
|
180−190
+5967%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 44
−532%
|
270−280
+532%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−5767%
|
170−180
+5767%
|
| Dota 2 | 18−20
−4374%
|
850−900
+4374%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−10100%
|
306
+10100%
|
| Fortnite | 5−6
−5940%
|
300−350
+5940%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−3388%
|
270−280
+3388%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−14850%
|
299
+14850%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
−8450%
|
170−180
+8450%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−5867%
|
170−180
+5867%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−1660%
|
170−180
+1660%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−6129%
|
436
+6129%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−1022%
|
400−450
+1022%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Baldur's Gate 3 | 5−6
−3680%
|
189
+3680%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
−5967%
|
180−190
+5967%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−5767%
|
170−180
+5767%
|
| Dota 2 | 18−20
−4374%
|
850−900
+4374%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−9567%
|
290
+9567%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−3388%
|
270−280
+3388%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−1660%
|
170−180
+1660%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−2900%
|
210
+2900%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−1022%
|
400−450
+1022%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 5−6
−5940%
|
300−350
+5940%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
−21400%
|
210−220
+21400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 10−11
−5060%
|
500−550
+5060%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 140−150 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−1650%
|
170−180
+1650%
|
| Valorant | 9−10
−5289%
|
450−500
+5289%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Baldur's Gate 3 | 0−1 | 135 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−10200%
|
100−110
+10200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−22100%
|
222
+22100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−6000%
|
240−250
+6000%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−8200%
|
166
+8200%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−4933%
|
150−160
+4933%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−956%
|
160−170
+956%
|
| Valorant | 8−9
−4050%
|
300−350
+4050%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 50−55 |
| Dota 2 | 2−3
−4400%
|
90−95
+4400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−4700%
|
95−100
+4700%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−2533%
|
75−80
+2533%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Metro Exodus | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Baldur's Gate 3 | 115
+0%
|
115
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 150
+0%
|
150
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Baldur's Gate 3 | 73
+0%
|
73
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 116
+0%
|
116
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 200−210
+0%
|
200−210
+0%
|
This is how HD 7520G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics and RTX 5070 compete in popular games:
- RTX 5070 is 4248% faster in 900p
- RTX 5070 is 1188% faster in 1080p
- RTX 5070 is 6250% faster in 1440p
- RTX 5070 is 8000% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 5070 is 22100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 5070 is ahead in 46 tests (77%)
- there's a draw in 14 tests (23%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.61 | 72.51 |
| Recency | 15 May 2012 | 4 March 2025 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 5 nm |
RTX 5070 has a 4403.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 5070 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7520G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 7520G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 5070 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.
