Radeon RX 560 vs RX 470 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 470 Mobile with Radeon RX 560, including specs and performance data.
470 Mobile outperforms 560 by an impressive 87% 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 | 356 | 519 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 88 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.52 | 1.48 |
| Power efficiency | 14.77 | 8.93 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) |
| GPU code name | Ellesmere | Polaris 21 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 4 August 2016 (9 years ago) | 18 April 2017 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $549.99 | $99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
RX 470 Mobile has 138% better value for money than RX 560.
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 cores | 2048 | 1024 |
| Core clock speed | 926 MHz | 1175 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1074 MHz | 1275 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,700 million | 3,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 85 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 137.5 | 81.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.399 TFLOPS | 2.611 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 16 |
| TMUs | 128 | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 1024 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 size | large | no data |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Length | no data | 170 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| 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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 112.0 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 | 1x 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 | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2.131 |
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 | 65−70
+85.7%
| 35
−85.7%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 8.46
−199%
| 2.83
+199%
|
- RX 560 has 199% lower cost per frame in 1080p
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 95−100
+90%
|
50−55
−90%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+94.4%
|
18−20
−94.4%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 30−35
+93.8%
|
16−18
−93.8%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+103%
|
35−40
−103%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 95−100
+90%
|
50−55
−90%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+94.4%
|
18−20
−94.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 55−60
+104%
|
27−30
−104%
|
| Fortnite | 90−95
+104%
|
45−50
−104%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+97.1%
|
35−40
−97.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+96.3%
|
27−30
−96.3%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 30−35
+93.8%
|
16−18
−93.8%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+110%
|
30−33
−110%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+88.6%
|
70−75
−88.6%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+103%
|
35−40
−103%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 95−100
+90%
|
50−55
−90%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 210−220
+94.5%
|
110−120
−94.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+94.4%
|
18−20
−94.4%
|
| Dota 2 | 100−110
+102%
|
50−55
−102%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 55−60
+104%
|
27−30
−104%
|
| Fortnite | 90−95
+104%
|
45−50
−104%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+97.1%
|
35−40
−97.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+96.3%
|
27−30
−96.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 60−65
+110%
|
30−33
−110%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 30−35
+93.8%
|
16−18
−93.8%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+94.4%
|
18−20
−94.4%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+110%
|
30−33
−110%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 45−50
+91.7%
|
24−27
−91.7%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+88.6%
|
70−75
−88.6%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+103%
|
35−40
−103%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+94.4%
|
18−20
−94.4%
|
| Dota 2 | 100−110
+102%
|
50−55
−102%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 55−60
+104%
|
27−30
−104%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+97.1%
|
35−40
−97.1%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 30−35
+93.8%
|
16−18
−93.8%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+110%
|
30−33
−110%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 45−50
+91.7%
|
24−27
−91.7%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+88.6%
|
70−75
−88.6%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 90−95
+104%
|
45−50
−104%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+88.9%
|
18−20
−88.9%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 120−130
+89.2%
|
65−70
−89.2%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 27−30
+100%
|
14−16
−100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
+110%
|
10−11
−110%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 160−170
+89.4%
|
85−90
−89.4%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+92.9%
|
85−90
−92.9%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+95.8%
|
24−27
−95.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+87.5%
|
8−9
−87.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+106%
|
18−20
−106%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+95.2%
|
21−24
−95.2%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 18−20
+100%
|
9−10
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+108%
|
12−14
−108%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 35−40
+111%
|
18−20
−111%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+100%
|
7−8
−100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+93.8%
|
16−18
−93.8%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+117%
|
6−7
−117%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+100%
|
12−14
−100%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+88%
|
50−55
−88%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+108%
|
12−14
−108%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+100%
|
7−8
−100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 55−60
+96.7%
|
30−33
−96.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+100%
|
9−10
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+107%
|
14−16
−107%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 16−18
+88.9%
|
9−10
−88.9%
|
This is how RX 470 Mobile and RX 560 compete in popular games:
- RX 470 Mobile is 86% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 15.59 | 8.32 |
| Recency | 4 August 2016 | 18 April 2017 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 85 Watt | 75 Watt |
RX 470 Mobile has a 87.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
RX 560, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 months, and 13.3% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX 470 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 560 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon RX 470 Mobile is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX 560 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
