GeForce Go 7950 GTX vs Radeon RX 460 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 460 Mobile and GeForce Go 7950 GTX, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
460 Mobile outperforms Go 7950 GTX by a whopping 1387% 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 | 506 | 1257 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 13.12 | 1.08 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | Baffin | G71 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 8 August 2016 (9 years ago) | 12 October 2006 (19 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $86 | 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 | 896 | 32 |
| Core clock speed | 1000 MHz | 575 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1180 MHz | 575 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | 278 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 45 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 66.08 | 13.80 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.115 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 56 | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 224 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 1024 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 | large |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | MXM-III |
| 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 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz | 700 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 80 GB/s | 44.8 GB/s |
| 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 |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | N/A |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
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 | 35
+1650%
| 2−3
−1650%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 2.46 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+1600%
|
3−4
−1600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+1800%
|
1−2
−1800%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+2000%
|
2−3
−2000%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+1600%
|
3−4
−1600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+1800%
|
1−2
−1800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1800%
|
3−4
−1800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+720%
|
5−6
−720%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+2800%
|
1−2
−2800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+325%
|
8−9
−325%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+229%
|
27−30
−229%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+2000%
|
2−3
−2000%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+1600%
|
3−4
−1600%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 140−150
+658%
|
18−20
−658%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+1800%
|
1−2
−1800%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+475%
|
12−14
−475%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1800%
|
3−4
−1800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+720%
|
5−6
−720%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+2800%
|
1−2
−2800%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35−40
+1650%
|
2−3
−1650%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+325%
|
8−9
−325%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30
+400%
|
6−7
−400%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+229%
|
27−30
−229%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+2000%
|
2−3
−2000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+1800%
|
1−2
−1800%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+475%
|
12−14
−475%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+720%
|
5−6
−720%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+325%
|
8−9
−325%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 17
+183%
|
6−7
−183%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+229%
|
27−30
−229%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1800%
|
3−4
−1800%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+500%
|
3−4
−500%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 70−75
+2300%
|
3−4
−2300%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+600%
|
7−8
−600%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+1400%
|
7−8
−1400%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+1050%
|
2−3
−1050%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+550%
|
2−3
−550%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+42.9%
|
14−16
−42.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 50−55
+1567%
|
3−4
−1567%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+1650%
|
2−3
−1650%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
This is how RX 460 Mobile and Go 7950 GTX compete in popular games:
- RX 460 Mobile is 1650% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 460 Mobile is 2300% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RX 460 Mobile surpassed Go 7950 GTX in all 28 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.37 | 0.63 |
| Recency | 8 August 2016 | 12 October 2006 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 45 Watt |
RX 460 Mobile has a 1387% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 543% more advanced lithography process.
Go 7950 GTX, on the other hand, has 22% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX 460 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce Go 7950 GTX 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.
