RTX A4500 Embedded vs Radeon RX 6700M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 6700M with RTX A4500 Embedded, including specs and performance data.
RX 6700M outperforms RTX A4500 Embedded by an impressive 59% 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 | 181 | 297 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 18.15 | 19.27 |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | Navi 22 | GA104 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 31 May 2021 (4 years ago) | 30 March 2022 (3 years ago) |
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 | 2304 | 5888 |
| Core clock speed | 1489 MHz | 510 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2400 MHz | 1215 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 17,200 million | 17,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 135 Watt | 80 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 345.6 | 223.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | 11.06 TFLOPS | 14.31 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 96 |
| TMUs | 144 | 184 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 184 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 36 | 46 |
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 | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 10 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 160 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 320.0 GB/s | 384.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | + | + |
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 | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| CUDA | - | 8.6 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
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 | 118
+68.6%
| 70−75
−68.6%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 180−190
+66.4%
|
110−120
−66.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 70−75
+64.4%
|
45−50
−64.4%
|
| God of War | 75−80
+66.7%
|
45−50
−66.7%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+70%
|
70−75
−70%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 180−190
+66.4%
|
110−120
−66.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 70−75
+64.4%
|
45−50
−64.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 103
+71.7%
|
60−65
−71.7%
|
| Fortnite | 140−150
+63.3%
|
90−95
−63.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
+69.3%
|
75−80
−69.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 100−110
+71.7%
|
60−65
−71.7%
|
| God of War | 75−80
+66.7%
|
45−50
−66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+63.8%
|
80−85
−63.8%
|
| Valorant | 200−210
+67.5%
|
120−130
−67.5%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+70%
|
70−75
−70%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 180−190
+66.4%
|
110−120
−66.4%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+62.9%
|
170−180
−62.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 70−75
+64.4%
|
45−50
−64.4%
|
| Dota 2 | 123
+64%
|
75−80
−64%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 97
+61.7%
|
60−65
−61.7%
|
| Fortnite | 140−150
+63.3%
|
90−95
−63.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
+69.3%
|
75−80
−69.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 100−110
+71.7%
|
60−65
−71.7%
|
| God of War | 75−80
+66.7%
|
45−50
−66.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 117
+67.1%
|
70−75
−67.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 75−80
+68.9%
|
45−50
−68.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+63.8%
|
80−85
−63.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 164
+64%
|
100−105
−64%
|
| Valorant | 200−210
+67.5%
|
120−130
−67.5%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+70%
|
70−75
−70%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 70−75
+64.4%
|
45−50
−64.4%
|
| Dota 2 | 112
+60%
|
70−75
−60%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 91
+65.5%
|
55−60
−65.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
+69.3%
|
75−80
−69.3%
|
| God of War | 75−80
+66.7%
|
45−50
−66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+63.8%
|
80−85
−63.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 95
+72.7%
|
55−60
−72.7%
|
| Valorant | 175
+59.1%
|
110−120
−59.1%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 140−150
+63.3%
|
90−95
−63.3%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 75−80
+71.1%
|
45−50
−71.1%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 220−230
+62.1%
|
140−150
−62.1%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 60−65
+60%
|
40−45
−60%
|
| Metro Exodus | 45−50
+70.4%
|
27−30
−70.4%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+59.1%
|
110−120
−59.1%
|
| Valorant | 230−240
+68.6%
|
140−150
−68.6%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 85−90
+72%
|
50−55
−72%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+71.4%
|
21−24
−71.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 75−80
+71.1%
|
45−50
−71.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 85−90
+61.8%
|
55−60
−61.8%
|
| God of War | 40−45
+70.8%
|
24−27
−70.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 55−60
+65.7%
|
35−40
−65.7%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 80−85
+66%
|
50−55
−66%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+71.4%
|
21−24
−71.4%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 65−70
+65%
|
40−45
−65%
|
| Metro Exodus | 27−30
+61.1%
|
18−20
−61.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 50−55
+66.7%
|
30−33
−66.7%
|
| Valorant | 190−200
+65%
|
120−130
−65%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+70%
|
30−33
−70%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+71.4%
|
21−24
−71.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+60%
|
10−11
−60%
|
| Dota 2 | 95−100
+65%
|
60−65
−65%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40−45
+70.8%
|
24−27
−70.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+68.6%
|
35−40
−68.6%
|
| God of War | 27−30
+68.8%
|
16−18
−68.8%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+66.7%
|
24−27
−66.7%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 40−45
+66.7%
|
24−27
−66.7%
|
This is how RX 6700M and RTX A4500 Embedded compete in popular games:
- RX 6700M is 69% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 32.18 | 20.25 |
| Recency | 31 May 2021 | 30 March 2022 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 10 GB | 16 GB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 135 Watt | 80 Watt |
RX 6700M has a 58.9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.
RTX A4500 Embedded, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 months, a 60% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 68.8% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX 6700M is our recommended choice as it beats the RTX A4500 Embedded in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon RX 6700M is a notebook graphics card while RTX A4500 Embedded is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
