GeForce GT 230M vs Radeon RX 470 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 470 Mobile and GeForce GT 230M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX 470 Mobile
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 85 Watt
15.58
+3080%

470 Mobile outperforms 230M by a whopping 3080% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3581276
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.51no data
Power efficiency14.771.72
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameEllesmereGT216
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date4 August 2016 (9 years ago)15 June 2009 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores204848
Core clock speed926 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed1074 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,700 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)85 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate137.58.000
Floating-point processing power4.399 TFLOPS0.1056 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data158
ROPs328
TMUs12816
L1 Cache512 KBno data
L2 Cache2 MB64 KB

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount8 GBUp to 1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHzUp to 600 (DDR2), Up to 800 (GDDR3), Up to 1066 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth224.0 GB/s16 (DDR2), 25 (DDR3)
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 ConnectorsNo outputsDual Link DVIVGADisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVI
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataHDA

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
Power managementno data8.0

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.44.1
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-+

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+4650%
2−3
−4650%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+3400%
1−2
−3400%
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
+520%
5−6
−520%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 70−75
+3450%
2−3
−3450%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+4650%
2−3
−4650%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+3400%
1−2
−3400%
Far Cry 5 55−60 0−1
Fortnite 90−95
+4500%
2−3
−4500%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+1280%
5−6
−1280%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+5200%
1−2
−5200%
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
+520%
5−6
−520%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+688%
8−9
−688%
Valorant 130−140
+371%
27−30
−371%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 70−75
+3450%
2−3
−3450%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+4650%
2−3
−4650%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+1159%
16−18
−1159%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+3400%
1−2
−3400%
Dota 2 100−110
+818%
10−12
−818%
Far Cry 5 55−60 0−1
Fortnite 90−95
+4500%
2−3
−4500%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+1280%
5−6
−1280%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+5200%
1−2
−5200%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
+6200%
1−2
−6200%
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
+520%
5−6
−520%
Metro Exodus 35−40 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+688%
8−9
−688%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+820%
5−6
−820%
Valorant 130−140
+371%
27−30
−371%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 70−75
+3450%
2−3
−3450%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+3400%
1−2
−3400%
Dota 2 100−110
+818%
10−12
−818%
Far Cry 5 55−60 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+1280%
5−6
−1280%
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
+520%
5−6
−520%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+688%
8−9
−688%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+820%
5−6
−820%
Valorant 130−140
+371%
27−30
−371%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 90−95
+4500%
2−3
−4500%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+1033%
3−4
−1033%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+6050%
2−3
−6050%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30 0−1
Metro Exodus 21−24 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+3120%
5−6
−3120%
Valorant 160−170
+3180%
5−6
−3180%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 45−50
+4600%
1−2
−4600%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16 0−1
Far Cry 5 35−40
+3600%
1−2
−3600%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+1950%
2−3
−1950%
Hogwarts Legacy 18−20 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 35−40 0−1

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 14−16 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+107%
14−16
−107%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11 0−1
Metro Exodus 12−14 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27 0−1
Valorant 90−95
+3033%
3−4
−3033%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 14−16 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1
Dota 2 55−60
+5800%
1−2
−5800%
Far Cry 5 18−20 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 27−30 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%

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 470 Mobile is 6050% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, RX 470 Mobile surpassed GT 230M in all 31 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.58 0.49
Recency 4 August 2016 15 June 2009
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 85 Watt 23 Watt

RX 470 Mobile has a 3079.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

GT 230M, on the other hand, has 269.6% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 470 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 230M in performance tests.

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 RX 470 Mobile
Radeon RX 470 Mobile
NVIDIA GeForce GT 230M
GeForce GT 230M

Other comparisons

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.


4.1 32 votes

Rate Radeon RX 470 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 29 votes

Rate GeForce GT 230M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX 470 Mobile or GeForce GT 230M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.