Radeon RX 470 Mobile vs RX Vega M GH

Place in the ranking	324	308
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	10.15
Power efficiency	11.78	14.78
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	Polaris 22	Ellesmere
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 February 2018 (7 years ago)	4 August 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$549.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	1536	2048
Core clock speed	1063 MHz	926 MHz
Boost clock speed	1190 MHz	1074 MHz
Number of transistors	5,000 million	5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	85 Watt
Texture fill rate	114.2	137.5
Floating-point processing power	3.656 TFLOPS	4.399 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	32
TMUs	96	128

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	large
Interface	IGP	MXM-B (3.0)

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	HBM2	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	1024 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	204.8 GB/s	224.0 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

No outputs

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync

API compatibility

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

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. 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 Vega M GH 16.89

RX 470 Mobile 18.01
+6.6%

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 Vega M GH 10248

RX 470 Mobile 10715
+4.6%

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	58 −3.4%	60−65 +3.4%
1440p	44 −2.3%	45−50 +2.3%
4K	30 +0%	30−35 +0%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	9.17
1440p	no data	12.22
4K	no data	18.33

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−33 −6.7%	30−35 +6.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	39 +8.3%	35−40 −8.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	53 −9.4%	55−60 +9.4%
Counter-Strike 2	30−33 −6.7%	30−35 +6.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	15 −140%	35−40 +140%
Forza Horizon 4	85 +11.8%	75−80 −11.8%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 −6.5%	45−50 +6.5%
Metro Exodus	55 +12.2%	45−50 −12.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	39 −10.3%	40−45 +10.3%
Valorant	65−70 −7.2%	70−75 +7.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 −5.5%	55−60 +5.5%
Counter-Strike 2	30−33 −6.7%	30−35 +6.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	12 −200%	35−40 +200%
Dota 2	76 +16.9%	65−70 −16.9%
Far Cry 5	46 −34.8%	60−65 +34.8%
Fortnite	90−95 −5.4%	95−100 +5.4%
Forza Horizon 4	68 −11.8%	75−80 +11.8%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 −6.5%	45−50 +6.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	60 −8.3%	65−70 +8.3%
Metro Exodus	38 −28.9%	45−50 +28.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	71 −76.1%	120−130 +76.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 −4.9%	40−45 +4.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 −7.5%	55−60 +7.5%
Valorant	41 −80.5%	70−75 +80.5%
World of Tanks	210−220 −3.8%	210−220 +3.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	41 −41.5%	55−60 +41.5%
Counter-Strike 2	30−33 −6.7%	30−35 +6.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	12 −200%	35−40 +200%
Dota 2	95 +46.2%	65−70 −46.2%
Far Cry 5	63 +1.6%	60−65 −1.6%
Forza Horizon 4	57 −33.3%	75−80 +33.3%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 −6.5%	45−50 +6.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	47 −166%	120−130 +166%
Valorant	65−70 −7.2%	70−75 +7.2%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	24−27 −7.7%	27−30 +7.7%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 −7.4%	27−30 +7.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160−170 −3.1%	160−170 +3.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%
World of Tanks	110−120 −5.9%	120−130 +5.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −5.7%	35−40 +5.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	2 −600%	14−16 +600%
Far Cry 5	42 −14.3%	45−50 +14.3%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 −7%	45−50 +7%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 −7.4%	27−30 +7.4%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −7.9%	40−45 +7.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −8.7%	24−27 +8.7%
Valorant	40−45 −7%	45−50 +7%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Dota 2	27−30 −6.9%	30−35 +6.9%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 −6.9%	30−35 +6.9%
Metro Exodus	11 −18.2%	12−14 +18.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	49 −10.2%	50−55 +10.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −6.9%	30−35 +6.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14 −28.6%	18−20 +28.6%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Dota 2	27−30 −6.9%	30−35 +6.9%
Far Cry 5	21 −9.5%	21−24 +9.5%
Fortnite	20−22 −5%	21−24 +5%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −8%	27−30 +8%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 −15.4%	14−16 +15.4%
Valorant	18−20 −10.5%	21−24 +10.5%

This is how RX Vega M GH and RX 470 Mobile compete in popular games:

RX 470 Mobile is 3% faster in 1080p
RX 470 Mobile is 2% faster in 1440p
A tie in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX Vega M GH is 46% faster.
in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 470 Mobile is 600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX Vega M GH is ahead in 6 tests (10%)
RX 470 Mobile is ahead in 54 tests (86%)
there's a draw in 3 tests (5%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	16.89	18.01
Recency	1 February 2018	4 August 2016
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	85 Watt

RX Vega M GH has an age advantage of 1 year.

RX 470 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 6.6% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 17.6% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon RX Vega M GH and Radeon RX 470 Mobile.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.