GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB vs Radeon R7 M270

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 M270 with GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB, including specs and performance data.

R7 M270
2014
0 MB Not Listed
1.99

GTX 1050 3 GB outperforms R7 M270 by a whopping 565% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking893384
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data12.19
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameOpalGP107
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date9 January 2014 (10 years ago)21 May 2018 (6 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 cores384768
Core clock speed725 MHz1392 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1518 MHz
Number of transistors950 million3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data75 Watt
Texture fill rate19.8072.86
Floating-point processing power0.6336 TFLOPS2.332 TFLOPS
ROPs824
TMUs2448

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeNot ListedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount0 MB3 GB
Memory bus widthNot Listed96 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1752 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/s84.1 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 outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1112 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
Mantle+-
CUDA-6.1

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.

R7 M270 1.99
GTX 1050 3 GB 13.23
+565%

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.

R7 M270 766
GTX 1050 3 GB 5105
+566%

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 HD13
−554%
85−90
+554%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%
Hitman 3 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−511%
110−120
+511%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−557%
230−240
+557%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%
Hitman 3 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−511%
110−120
+511%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−525%
75−80
+525%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−557%
230−240
+557%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%
Hitman 3 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−511%
110−120
+511%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−525%
75−80
+525%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−557%
230−240
+557%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Hitman 3 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−536%
70−75
+536%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%

This is how R7 M270 and GTX 1050 3 GB compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1050 3 GB is 554% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.99 13.23
Recency 9 January 2014 21 May 2018
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm

GTX 1050 3 GB has a 564.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M270 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 M270 is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB is a desktop 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 R7 M270
Radeon R7 M270
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB
GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB

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.


3.6 21 vote

Rate Radeon R7 M270 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 339 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB 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.