ATI Radeon 9700 PRO vs RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) with Radeon 9700 PRO, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
2020
15 Watt
8.26
+6254%

8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) outperforms 9700 PRO by a whopping 6254% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5451491
Place by popularity28not in top-100
Power efficiency42.45no data
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Rage 8 (2002−2007)
GPU code nameVegaR300
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date7 January 2020 (5 years ago)1 July 2002 (23 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 cores512no data
Core clock speedno data325 MHz
Boost clock speed2100 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data110 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rateno data2.600
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data8

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).

Interfaceno dataAGP 8x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataFloppy

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 typeno dataDDR
Maximum RAM amountno data128 MB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data310 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data19.84 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 data1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12_19.0 (9_0)
OpenGLno data2.0
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

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 HD22-0−1
1440p16-0−1
4K10-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 63 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 18 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 39 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 43 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 13 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 30−35 0−1
Far Cry 5 21 0−1
Fortnite 47 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 35−40 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 33 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33 0−1
Valorant 85−90
+8400%
1−2
−8400%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 33 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 19 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 48 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 9 0−1
Dota 2 51 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 30−35 0−1
Far Cry 5 20 0−1
Fortnite 31 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 35−40 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 28 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 18 0−1
Metro Exodus 16 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21 0−1
Valorant 85−90
+8400%
1−2
−8400%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 9 0−1
Dota 2 48 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 30−35 0−1
Far Cry 5 19 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 35−40 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14 0−1
Valorant 37 0−1

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 18 0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 16−18 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 9 0−1
Metro Exodus 10 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 22 0−1
Valorant 90−95
+9300%
1−2
−9300%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 5 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 16−18 0−1
Far Cry 5 16 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 20−22 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14 0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 16−18 0−1

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 10 0−1
Metro Exodus 6 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9 0−1
Valorant 40−45 0−1

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 9−10 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 18 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 7−8 0−1
Far Cry 5 8 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 14−16 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 8−9 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.26 0.13
Recency 7 January 2020 1 July 2002
Chip lithography 7 nm 150 nm

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has a 6253.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, and a 2042.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 9700 PRO in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is a notebook graphics card while Radeon 9700 PRO is a desktop one.

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 Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
ATI Radeon 9700 PRO
Radeon 9700 PRO

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.


3.8 1629 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 21 votes

Rate Radeon 9700 PRO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) or Radeon 9700 PRO, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.