Radeon HD 6670 vs HD 7970M

Place in the ranking	476	915
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.08
Power efficiency	6.40	1.96
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code name	Wimbledon	Turks
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Design	no data	reference
Release date	24 April 2012 (12 years ago)	19 April 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$99

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	480
Core clock speed	850 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	no data	800 MHz
Number of transistors	2,800 million	716 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	66 Watt
Texture fill rate	68.00	19.20
Floating-point processing power	2.176 TFLOPS	0.768 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	8
TMUs	80	24

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
Bus support	no data	PCIe 2.0 x16
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	168 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1200 MHz	1050 MHz
Memory bandwidth	153.6 GB/s	64 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	No outputs	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
Eyefinity	-	+
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_1)	DirectX® 11
Shader Model	5.1	5.0
OpenGL	4.6	4.4
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	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 7970M 9.28
+394%

HD 6670 1.88

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 7970M 3568
+393%

HD 6670 724

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 7970M 4694
+315%

HD 6670 1130

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 +425%	16−18 −425%
Full HD	61 +408%	12−14 −408%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

8.25

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +433%	3−4 −433%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +400%	6−7 −400%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +433%	3−4 −433%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +429%	7−8 −429%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +475%	4−5 −475%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +400%	5−6 −400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +400%	5−6 −400%
Valorant	35−40 +400%	7−8 −400%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +400%	6−7 −400%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +433%	3−4 −433%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Dota 2	30−35 +450%	6−7 −450%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +457%	7−8 −457%
Fortnite	50−55 +440%	10−11 −440%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +429%	7−8 −429%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +475%	4−5 −475%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 +450%	6−7 −450%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +400%	5−6 −400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 +414%	14−16 −414%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +400%	5−6 −400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +460%	5−6 −460%
Valorant	35−40 +400%	7−8 −400%
World of Tanks	121 +404%	24−27 −404%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +400%	6−7 −400%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +433%	3−4 −433%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Dota 2	30−35 +450%	6−7 −450%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +457%	7−8 −457%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +429%	7−8 −429%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +475%	4−5 −475%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 +414%	14−16 −414%
Valorant	35−40 +400%	7−8 −400%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Grand Theft Auto V	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +400%	9−10 −400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
World of Tanks	65−70 +458%	12−14 −458%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +417%	6−7 −417%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Far Cry 5	20−22 +400%	4−5 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +400%	4−5 −400%
Forza Horizon 5	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Valorant	21−24 +475%	4−5 −475%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4	0−1
Dota 2	20−22 +400%	4−5 −400%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 +440%	5−6 −440%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Counter-Strike 2	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4	0−1
Dota 2	20−22 +400%	4−5 −400%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
Fortnite	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Forza Horizon 5	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Valorant	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%

This is how HD 7970M and HD 6670 compete in popular games:

HD 7970M is 425% faster in 900p
HD 7970M is 408% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.28	1.88
Recency	24 April 2012	19 April 2011
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	66 Watt

HD 7970M has a 393.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

HD 6670, on the other hand, has 51.5% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 7970M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6670 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 7970M is a notebook card while Radeon HD 6670 is a desktop one.

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