ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5870 Crossfire vs HD 8970M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 8970M and Mobility Radeon HD 5870 Crossfire, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
HD 8970M outperforms ATI Mobility HD 5870 Crossfire by a whopping 106% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 453 | 646 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 6.95 | 2.81 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2011−2020) | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | Neptune | Broadway-XT |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 14 May 2013 (11 years ago) | 7 January 2010 (15 years 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 | 1280 | 1600 |
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz | 700 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 900 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,800 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 120 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 72.00 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.304 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 32 | no data |
| TMUs | 80 | 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 | large |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 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 | GDDR5 | DDR3, GDDR3, GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2x1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1200 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 153.6 GB/s | no data |
| 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 | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 11 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
| 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.
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 | 100−110
+88.7%
| 53
−88.7%
|
| Full HD | 51
−2%
| 52
+2%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+100%
|
10−11
−100%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+120%
|
14−16
−120%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+100%
|
10−11
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+105%
|
18−20
−105%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 24−27
+178%
|
9−10
−178%
|
| Metro Exodus | 27−30
+125%
|
12−14
−125%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 27−30
+80%
|
14−16
−80%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+179%
|
14−16
−179%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+120%
|
14−16
−120%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+100%
|
10−11
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 26
+73.3%
|
14−16
−73.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40−45
+70.8%
|
24−27
−70.8%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+103%
|
27−30
−103%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+105%
|
18−20
−105%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 24−27
+178%
|
9−10
−178%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 39
+160%
|
14−16
−160%
|
| Metro Exodus | 27−30
+125%
|
12−14
−125%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 75−80
+85.7%
|
40−45
−85.7%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 27−30
+80%
|
14−16
−80%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−33
+87.5%
|
16−18
−87.5%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+179%
|
14−16
−179%
|
| World of Tanks | 148
+85%
|
80−85
−85%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+120%
|
14−16
−120%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+100%
|
10−11
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+140%
|
14−16
−140%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40−45
+70.8%
|
24−27
−70.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+105%
|
18−20
−105%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 24−27
+178%
|
9−10
−178%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 75−80
+85.7%
|
40−45
−85.7%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+179%
|
14−16
−179%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+225%
|
4−5
−225%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+180%
|
5−6
−180%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+46.9%
|
30−35
−46.9%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| World of Tanks | 70−75
+106%
|
35−40
−106%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+171%
|
7−8
−171%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+120%
|
10−11
−120%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+188%
|
8−9
−188%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 14−16
+114%
|
7−8
−114%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+75%
|
8−9
−75%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+78.6%
|
14−16
−78.6%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Dota 2 | 20−22
+17.6%
|
16−18
−17.6%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+25%
|
16−18
−25%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
+107%
|
14−16
−107%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 20−22
+25%
|
16−18
−25%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Dota 2 | 20−22
+17.6%
|
16−18
−17.6%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+140%
|
5−6
−140%
|
| Fortnite | 10−12
+175%
|
4−5
−175%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+225%
|
4−5
−225%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Valorant | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
This is how HD 8970M and ATI Mobility HD 5870 Crossfire compete in popular games:
- HD 8970M is 89% faster in 900p
- ATI Mobility HD 5870 Crossfire is 2% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD 8970M is 533% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, HD 8970M surpassed ATI Mobility HD 5870 Crossfire in all 60 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.68 | 4.69 |
| Recency | 14 May 2013 | 7 January 2010 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 120 Watt |
HD 8970M has a 106.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 20% lower power consumption.
The Radeon HD 8970M is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 5870 Crossfire 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.
