Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) vs R9 M470
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R9 M470 and Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
R9 M470 outperforms 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) by a substantial 34% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 649 | 721 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 40 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 21.28 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | Vega (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | Emerald | Vega Raven Ridge |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 May 2016 (9 years ago) | 26 October 2017 (8 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 | 768 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,080 million | 9,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 48.00 | 57.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.536 TFLOPS | 1.843 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 8 |
| TMUs | 48 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 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 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 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 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 HD | 24−27
+33.3%
| 18
−33.3%
|
| 4K | 12−14
+20%
| 10
−20%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27−30
+50%
|
18−20
−50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+22.2%
|
9
−22.2%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+0%
|
24
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27−30
+50%
|
18−20
−50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+22.2%
|
9
−22.2%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 21−24
+46.7%
|
15
−46.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+50%
|
12
−50%
|
| Fortnite | 30−35
+13.3%
|
30
−13.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+0%
|
26
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 16−18
−6.3%
|
17
+6.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+23.5%
|
17
−23.5%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
+17.9%
|
55−60
−17.9%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+9.1%
|
22
−9.1%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27−30
+50%
|
18−20
−50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 95−100
+126%
|
42
−126%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+83.3%
|
6
−83.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 45−50
+23.7%
|
38
−23.7%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 21−24
+37.5%
|
16−18
−37.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+80%
|
10
−80%
|
| Fortnite | 30−35
+78.9%
|
19
−78.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
−15.4%
|
30
+15.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 16−18
+45.5%
|
10−12
−45.5%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 18−20
+46.2%
|
13
−46.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−12
+57.1%
|
7
−57.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+50%
|
14
−50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+15.4%
|
13
−15.4%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
+17.9%
|
55−60
−17.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+4.3%
|
23
−4.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+120%
|
5
−120%
|
| Dota 2 | 45−50
+34.3%
|
35
−34.3%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 21−24
+37.5%
|
16−18
−37.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+100%
|
9
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+13%
|
23
−13%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+50%
|
14
−50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+87.5%
|
8
−87.5%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
+340%
|
15
−340%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 30−35
+240%
|
10
−240%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 40−45
+34.4%
|
30−35
−34.4%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+12.1%
|
30−35
−12.1%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+40%
|
45−50
−40%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+30%
|
10−11
−30%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+33.3%
|
21−24
−33.3%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
−100%
|
6
+100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 20−22
+33.3%
|
15
−33.3%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9
+12.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
This is how R9 M470 and RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) compete in popular games:
- R9 M470 is 33% faster in 1080p
- R9 M470 is 20% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 M470 is 700% faster.
- in Battlefield 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- R9 M470 performs better in 53 tests (88%)
- RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) performs better in 4 tests (7%)
- there's a draw in 3 tests (5%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 5.50 | 4.10 |
| Recency | 15 May 2016 | 26 October 2017 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
R9 M470 has a 34.1% higher aggregate performance score.
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon R9 M470 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 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.
