Radeon RX 5500M vs HD 7870

Place in the ranking	408	360
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.96	no data
Power efficiency	4.73	11.82
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code name	Pitcairn	Navi 14
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	5 March 2012 (12 years ago)	7 October 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$349	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	1280	1408
Core clock speed	1000 MHz	1375 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1645 MHz
Number of transistors	2,800 million	6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	175 Watt	85 Watt
Texture fill rate	80.00	144.8
Floating-point processing power	2.56 TFLOPS	4.632 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	80	88

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	no data	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	241 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	None

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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1200 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	153.6 GB/s	224.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort	No outputs
Eyefinity	+	-
HDMI	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

HD 7870 12.02

RX 5500M 14.59
+21.4%

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.

HD 7870 4620

RX 5500M 5609
+21.4%

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.

HD 7870 6194

RX 5500M 16476
+166%

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	84 −19%	100−110 +19%
Full HD	66 +13.8%	58 −13.8%
1440p	50−55 −26%	63 +26%
4K	24−27 −25%	30 +25%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	5.29	no data
1440p	6.98	no data
4K	14.54	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −95.5%	43 +95.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 −139%	55 +139%
Elden Ring	35−40 +0%	36 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −20.5%	45−50 +20.5%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −63.6%	36 +63.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 −73.9%	40 +73.9%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −110%	101 +110%
Metro Exodus	30−35 −21.2%	40−45 +21.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −83.9%	57 +83.9%
Valorant	45−50 −130%	108 +130%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −20.5%	45−50 +20.5%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −36.4%	30 +36.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 −34.8%	31 +34.8%
Dota 2	40−45 −105%	88 +105%
Elden Ring	35−40 −75%	63 +75%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +34.3%	35 −34.3%
Fortnite	65−70 −18.8%	80−85 +18.8%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −70.8%	82 +70.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	40−45 −83.7%	79 +83.7%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +106%	16 −106%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	90−95 +2.3%	88 −2.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −3.2%	32 +3.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −22.2%	40−45 +22.2%
Valorant	45−50 −21.3%	57 +21.3%
World of Tanks	160−170 −15.1%	191 +15.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −20.5%	45−50 +20.5%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −18.2%	24−27 +18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 −17.4%	27 +17.4%
Dota 2	40−45 −140%	103 +140%
Far Cry 5	45−50 −91.5%	90 +91.5%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −50%	72 +50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	90−95 −16.7%	100−110 +16.7%
Valorant	45−50 −23.4%	55−60 +23.4%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −31.3%	21−24 +31.3%
Elden Ring	18−20 −22.2%	21−24 +22.2%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −23.5%	21−24 +23.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 −154%	175 +154%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −30%	12−14 +30%
World of Tanks	85−90 −61.2%	137 +61.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 −20.8%	27−30 +20.8%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −18.2%	12−14 +18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +12.5%	8 −12.5%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −29.6%	35−40 +29.6%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −25%	35−40 +25%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −88%	47 +88%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%
Valorant	30−33 −20%	35−40 +20%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
Dota 2	21−24 +10%	20 −10%
Elden Ring	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 +10%	20 −10%
Metro Exodus	7−8 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −106%	72 +106%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +10%	20 −10%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3 +0%
Dota 2	21−24 −141%	53 +141%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%
Fortnite	12−14 −23.1%	16−18 +23.1%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −25%	20−22 +25%
Valorant	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%

4K
High Preset

World of Tanks

+0%

This is how HD 7870 and RX 5500M compete in popular games:

RX 5500M is 19% faster in 900p
HD 7870 is 14% faster in 1080p
RX 5500M is 26% faster in 1440p
RX 5500M is 25% faster in 4K

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the HD 7870 is 106% faster.
in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 5500M is 154% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD 7870 is ahead in 7 tests (11%)
RX 5500M is ahead in 54 tests (84%)
there's a draw in 3 tests (5%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	12.02	14.59
Recency	5 March 2012	7 October 2019
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	175 Watt	85 Watt

RX 5500M has a 21.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 105.9% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 5500M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7870 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 7870 is a desktop card while Radeon RX 5500M is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.