GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition vs Radeon RX 470
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 470 with GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition, including specs and performance data.
RX 470 outperforms GTX 775M Mac Edition by a whopping 524% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 272 | 743 |
| Place by popularity | 42 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 17.29 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 12.09 | 2.33 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | Ellesmere | GK104 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 4 August 2016 (8 years ago) | 8 November 2013 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $179 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 | 1344 |
| Core clock speed | 926 MHz | 797 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1206 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 5,700 million | 3,540 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 154.4 | 89.26 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.94 TFLOPS | 2.142 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 128 | 112 |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Length | 241 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | no data |
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 | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1650 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 211.2 GB/s | 160.0 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 Connectors | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | + | - |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | - | 3.0 |
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 | 71
+610%
| 10−12
−610%
|
| 1440p | 39
+550%
| 6−7
−550%
|
| 4K | 38
+533%
| 6−7
−533%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 2.52 | no data |
| 1440p | 4.59 | no data |
| 4K | 4.71 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+533%
|
6−7
−533%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+600%
|
6−7
−600%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+560%
|
10−11
−560%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+533%
|
6−7
−533%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+600%
|
6−7
−600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 105
+556%
|
16−18
−556%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 55−60
+600%
|
8−9
−600%
|
| Metro Exodus | 74
+640%
|
10−11
−640%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 45−50
+586%
|
7−8
−586%
|
| Valorant | 85−90
+608%
|
12−14
−608%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+560%
|
10−11
−560%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+533%
|
6−7
−533%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+600%
|
6−7
−600%
|
| Dota 2 | 48
+586%
|
7−8
−586%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 52
+550%
|
8−9
−550%
|
| Fortnite | 110−120
+588%
|
16−18
−588%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 88
+529%
|
14−16
−529%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 55−60
+600%
|
8−9
−600%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 73
+630%
|
10−11
−630%
|
| Metro Exodus | 34
+580%
|
5−6
−580%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 71
+610%
|
10−11
−610%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 45−50
+586%
|
7−8
−586%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70
+570%
|
10−11
−570%
|
| Valorant | 85−90
+608%
|
12−14
−608%
|
| World of Tanks | 230−240
+580%
|
35−40
−580%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+560%
|
10−11
−560%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+533%
|
6−7
−533%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+600%
|
6−7
−600%
|
| Dota 2 | 70−75
+640%
|
10−11
−640%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65−70
+580%
|
10−11
−580%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 67
+570%
|
10−11
−570%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 55−60
+600%
|
8−9
−600%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 59
+556%
|
9−10
−556%
|
| Valorant | 85−90
+608%
|
12−14
−608%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+600%
|
3−4
−600%
|
| Dota 2 | 33
+560%
|
5−6
−560%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 33
+560%
|
5−6
−560%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+541%
|
27−30
−541%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| World of Tanks | 140−150
+576%
|
21−24
−576%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+617%
|
6−7
−617%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 55−60
+544%
|
9−10
−544%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 51
+538%
|
8−9
−538%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−35
+560%
|
5−6
−560%
|
| Metro Exodus | 46
+557%
|
7−8
−557%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−33
+650%
|
4−5
−650%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+588%
|
8−9
−588%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Dota 2 | 33
+560%
|
5−6
−560%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 33
+560%
|
5−6
−560%
|
| Metro Exodus | 16−18
+700%
|
2−3
−700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 62
+589%
|
9−10
−589%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
+550%
|
2−3
−550%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 33
+560%
|
5−6
−560%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+600%
|
3−4
−600%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Dota 2 | 86
+617%
|
12−14
−617%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27−30
+575%
|
4−5
−575%
|
| Fortnite | 25
+525%
|
4−5
−525%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 25
+525%
|
4−5
−525%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+550%
|
4−5
−550%
|
This is how RX 470 and GTX 775M Mac Edition compete in popular games:
- RX 470 is 610% faster in 1080p
- RX 470 is 550% faster in 1440p
- RX 470 is 533% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 20.22 | 3.24 |
| Recency | 4 August 2016 | 8 November 2013 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 100 Watt |
RX 470 has a 524.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
GTX 775M Mac Edition, on the other hand, has 20% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX 470 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon RX 470 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
