Radeon Pro Vega 16 vs HD 8970M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8970M with Radeon Pro Vega 16, including specs and performance data.

HD 8970M
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
10.05

Pro Vega 16 outperforms HD 8970M by a significant 24% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking442396
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code nameNeptuneVega Mobile
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date15 May 2013 (11 years ago)15 November 2018 (5 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 cores12801024
Core clock speed850 MHzno data
Boost clock speed900 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate72.0076.16
Floating-point processing power2.304 gflops2.437 gflops
ROPs3232
TMUs8064

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 sizelargelarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16

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 typeGDDR5HBM2
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed4800 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth153.6 GB/s307.2 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131

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 8970M 10.05
Pro Vega 16 12.47
+24.1%

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 8970M 3876
Pro Vega 16 4809
+24.1%

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 8970M 6818
Pro Vega 16 10569
+55%

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 8970M 5039
Pro Vega 16 7745
+53.7%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

HD 8970M 31027
Pro Vega 16 56273
+81.4%

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 HD53
−3.8%
55
+3.8%
4K30−35
−26.7%
38
+26.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−18.8%
18−20
+18.8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−20.8%
27−30
+20.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
−33.3%
20−22
+33.3%
Battlefield 5 30−35
−29%
40−45
+29%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
−25%
24−27
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−18.8%
18−20
+18.8%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−26.1%
27−30
+26.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
−21.4%
30−35
+21.4%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−22.4%
80−85
+22.4%
Hitman 3 18−20
−21.1%
21−24
+21.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
−20%
65−70
+20%
Metro Exodus 30−35
−28.1%
40−45
+28.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
−21.4%
30−35
+21.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
−21.2%
40−45
+21.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−12.7%
70−75
+12.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−20.8%
27−30
+20.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
−33.3%
20−22
+33.3%
Battlefield 5 30−35
−29%
40−45
+29%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
−25%
24−27
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−18.8%
18−20
+18.8%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−26.1%
27−30
+26.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
−21.4%
30−35
+21.4%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−22.4%
80−85
+22.4%
Hitman 3 18−20
−21.1%
21−24
+21.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
−20%
65−70
+20%
Metro Exodus 30−35
−28.1%
40−45
+28.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
−21.4%
30−35
+21.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
−21.2%
40−45
+21.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 82
+165%
30−35
−165%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−12.7%
70−75
+12.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−20.8%
27−30
+20.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
−33.3%
20−22
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
−25%
24−27
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−18.8%
18−20
+18.8%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−26.1%
27−30
+26.1%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−22.4%
80−85
+22.4%
Hitman 3 18−20
−21.1%
21−24
+21.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
−20%
65−70
+20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
−21.2%
40−45
+21.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18
−50%
27
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−12.7%
70−75
+12.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
−21.4%
30−35
+21.4%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−26.7%
18−20
+26.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−30%
12−14
+30%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−35.6%
60−65
+35.6%
Hitman 3 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−19%
24−27
+19%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−33.3%
20−22
+33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−53.8%
20−22
+53.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−30%
12−14
+30%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−21.9%
75−80
+21.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−17.6%
20−22
+17.6%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Hitman 3 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
−37.2%
55−60
+37.2%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%

This is how HD 8970M and Pro Vega 16 compete in popular games:

  • Pro Vega 16 is 4% faster in 1080p
  • Pro Vega 16 is 27% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the HD 8970M is 165% faster.
  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro Vega 16 is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD 8970M is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • Pro Vega 16 is ahead in 71 test (99%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.05 12.47
Recency 15 May 2013 15 November 2018
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 75 Watt

Pro Vega 16 has a 24.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 33.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8970M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8970M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro Vega 16 is a mobile workstation one.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon HD 8970M
Radeon HD 8970M
AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
Radeon Pro Vega 16

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.4 45 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8970M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 10 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 16 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.