GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost vs Radeon RX 470 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 470 Mobile with GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost, including specs and performance data.

RX 470 Mobile
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 120 Watt
18.17
+110%

RX 470 Mobile outperforms GTX 650 Ti Boost by a whopping 110% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking302488
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.833.08
ArchitecturePolaris (2016−2019)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code namePolaris 10 ProGK106
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date4 August 2016 (8 years ago)26 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549.99 $169

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 470 Mobile has 187% better value for money than GTX 650 Ti Boost.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores2048768
CUDA coresno data768
Core clock speed926 MHz980 MHz
Boost clock speed1206 MHz1033 MHz
Number of transistors5,700 million2,540 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt134 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data97 °C
Texture fill rate137.566.05
Floating-point performance4.399 gflops1.585 gflops

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data241 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin
SLI options-+

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed7000 MHz6.0 GB/s
Memory bandwidth224.0 GB/s144.2 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 outputsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort
Multi monitor supportno data4 Displays
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
3D Blu-Ray-+
3D Gaming-+
3D Vision-+
3D Vision Live-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.3
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

RX 470 Mobile 18.17
+110%
GTX 650 Ti Boost 8.66

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.

RX 470 Mobile 10715
+144%
GTX 650 Ti Boost 4390

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 Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+133%
18−20
−133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+129%
14−16
−129%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+130%
27−30
−130%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+111%
18−20
−111%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+144%
18−20
−144%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+113%
24−27
−113%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+115%
55−60
−115%
Hitman 3 35−40
+131%
16−18
−131%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+130%
40−45
−130%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+117%
30−33
−117%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+113%
24−27
−113%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+130%
27−30
−130%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+123%
40−45
−123%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+133%
18−20
−133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+129%
14−16
−129%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+130%
27−30
−130%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+111%
18−20
−111%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+144%
18−20
−144%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+113%
24−27
−113%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+115%
55−60
−115%
Hitman 3 35−40
+131%
16−18
−131%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+130%
40−45
−130%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+117%
30−33
−117%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+113%
24−27
−113%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+130%
27−30
−130%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+139%
18−20
−139%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+123%
40−45
−123%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+133%
18−20
−133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+129%
14−16
−129%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+111%
18−20
−111%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+144%
18−20
−144%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+115%
55−60
−115%
Hitman 3 35−40
+131%
16−18
−131%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+130%
40−45
−130%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+130%
27−30
−130%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+139%
18−20
−139%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+123%
40−45
−123%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+113%
24−27
−113%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+125%
16−18
−125%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+142%
12−14
−142%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+111%
9−10
−111%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+120%
10−11
−120%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+131%
45−50
−131%
Hitman 3 21−24
+120%
10−11
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+111%
18−20
−111%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+119%
16−18
−119%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+111%
18−20
−111%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+126%
50−55
−126%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+111%
9−10
−111%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Hitman 3 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+116%
45−50
−116%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+122%
9−10
−122%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+111%
9−10
−111%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+117%
12−14
−117%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.17 8.66
Recency 4 August 2016 26 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 134 Watt

RX 470 Mobile has a 109.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 11.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 470 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 470 Mobile is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost 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 RX 470 Mobile
Radeon RX 470 Mobile
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost
GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost

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.


4.1 32 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 358 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost 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.