AMD Radeon HD 7770M vs AMD Radeon RX 7700 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the AMD Radeon RX 7700 and the AMD Radeon HD 7770M is limited by the available database records. The RX 7700 has a substantial set of nine benchmark results across multiple DirectX versions and compute workloads, while the HD 7770M has only one recorded score: a Geekbench Metal result of 13536. The head-to-head benchmark array in the database is empty, meaning there are no directly matched tests where both cards ran the identical workload. Consequently, the comparison relies on average scores and percentile rankings rather than side-by-side test results.

The RX 7700 posts an average benchmark score of 15852 across its full test suite. Its best individual results include a Geekbench OpenCL score of 106028, a Passmark G3D score of 20974, and a Passmark GPU Compute score of 10963. The HD 7770M, with its single Geekbench Metal score of 13536, sits notably lower in aggregate. The delta between the two average scores is 2316 points, which represents a 17.1% gap in favor of the RX 7700 when calculated against the HD 7770M baseline. That is a meaningful margin, though the comparison is skewed by the differing test sets and API coverage.

The percentile rankings reinforce the separation. The RX 7700 sits at the 58th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the HD 7770M sits at the 54th percentile. On the surface, a four-point percentile gap appears modest. However, percentile position reflects the distribution of all recorded GPUs, and the RX 7700 achieves its ranking across a far more demanding set of modern workloads, including DirectX 12 and compute-heavy tests. The HD 7770M reaches its percentile on the strength of a single Metal test, which is a narrower evidence base.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card clarifies the context. The RX 7700's closest competitors by average score are the AMD Radeon R9 370X at 15862 (0.1% ahead of the RX 7700), the AMD Radeon RX 9060 at 16014 (1% ahead), the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 at 15679 (1.1% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti at 16129 (1.7% ahead). The RX 7700 is essentially level with that cluster, trading places within a narrow 2.8% band. Meanwhile, the HD 7770M's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT at 13543 (0.1% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 at 13515 (0.2% behind), the NVIDIA P106-090 at 13470 (0.5% behind), and the AMD Radeon Pro 555 at 13407 (1% behind). The HD 7770M sits at the top of its own peer group, but that peer group operates at a substantially lower performance tier.

The individual benchmark breakdown for the RX 7700 shows a wide spread across API generations. Its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 261 dwarfs its DirectX 10 score of 92 and DirectX 11 score of 186, while DirectX 12 comes in at 96. The Passmark G2D score of 1206 indicates strong 2D throughput relative to its 3D scores. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2865 represents a modern, demanding workload. These numbers collectively describe a card that handles legacy APIs reasonably well and modern APIs competently, with compute performance (10963 in Passmark GPU Compute) outpacing its rasterization scores on a relative basis.

The HD 7770M's lone Metal score of 13536 cannot be compared directly to any single RX 7700 result because the two cards share no common test entry. The database does not record a Metal score for the RX 7700, nor does it record any DirectX or OpenCL score for the HD 7770M. This asymmetry means the only rigorous numerical comparison available is the average score and percentile position, both of which favor the RX 7700.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural eras. The RX 7700 uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture on the Navi 32 chip, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The HD 7770M uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on the Chelsea chip, built on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. That process gap alone explains much of the efficiency and density disparity. The RX 7700 packs 28,100 million transistors onto a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2 million per square millimeter. The HD 7770M contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, for a density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The RX 7700 achieves roughly 6.7 times the transistor density, which is consistent with the shift from 28 nm to 5 nm.

Core configuration differences are stark. The RX 7700 fields 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 96 raster output units, and 40 ray tracing cores. The HD 7770M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores. That is a 5x difference in shader count, a 5x difference in TMUs, and a 6x difference in ROPs. The RX 7700 also supports hardware ray tracing, a feature entirely absent from the GCN 1.0 part.

Memory subsystems reflect the generational leap. The RX 7700 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256 bit bus, delivering 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 7770M uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s. The RX 7700 has 16 times the capacity and roughly 9.8 times the bandwidth. The effective memory clock for the RX 7700 is 19.5 Gbps, while the HD 7770M operates at 4 Gbps effective. The RX 7700's memory clock is nearly 5 times higher.

Clock speeds are only partially specified for the HD 7770M. The RX 7700 lists a base clock of 1900 MHz, a boost clock of 2459 MHz, a game clock of 2041 MHz, and a memory clock of 2438 MHz. The HD 7770M lists no base, boost, or game clocks in the database, only a memory clock of 1000 MHz. The absence of core clock data for the older card makes direct frequency comparison impossible, but the architectural throughput figures fill the gap. The RX 7700 delivers 25.18 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the HD 7770M delivers 691.2 GFLOPS. That is a 36.4x difference in raw floating point throughput. The RX 7700 also records 25.18 TFLOPS of FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio, while the HD 7770M has no recorded FP16 figure, a common omission for GCN 1.0 parts.

Pixel and texture rates tell the same story. The RX 7700 achieves 236.1 GPixel/s and 393.4 GTexel/s. The HD 7770M achieves 10.80 GPixel/s and 21.60 GTexel/s. The RX 7700 is roughly 21.9x faster in pixel fill and 18.2x faster in texture fill. API support also diverges: the RX 7700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the HD 7770M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The DirectX feature level difference is particularly important, as 12_2 enables features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading that the 11_1 part cannot access.

Power and interface differences are substantial. The RX 7700 carries a 200 W TDP, uses dual-slot cooling, requires 2x 8-pin power connectors, and suggests a 550 W PSU. It connects via PCIe 4.0 x16. The HD 7770M has a 32 W TDP, no recorded slot width or power connector requirements, no suggested PSU, and uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The RX 7700 draws 6.25 times the power but delivers over 36 times the FP32 throughput, indicating a dramatic improvement in performance per watt per watt efficiency.

FAQ

Q: What is the process node difference between the RX 7700 and HD 7770M?

A:

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two cards?

Q: The RX 7700 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the HD 7770M has 1024 MB of GDDR5. The RX 7700 also has a 256 bit bus width with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the HD 7770M has a 128 bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

A: The RX 7700 uses a 5 nm process, the HD 7770M uses a 28 nm process, leading to a transistor density of 81.2 million per square millimeter versus 28,100 million total transistors on 346 mm².

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The RX 7700 has 2560 shading units, the HD 7770M has 512, a 5x gap.

Q: Does either card support ray tracing?

A: The RX 7700 includes 40 ray tracing cores, the HD 7770M has none recorded.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each card?

A: The RX 7700 has an average score of 15852, the HD 7770M has an average score of 13536.

Q: What percentile does each card rank at?

A: The RX 7700 sits at the 58th percentile, the HD 7770M sits at the 54th percentile.

Q: What is the TDP of each card?

A: The RX 7700 has a 200 W TDP, the HD 7770M has a 32 W TDP.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards:

• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 versus GCN 1.0
• Process Node: 5 nm versus 28 nm
• Transistors: 28,100 million versus 1,500 million
• Die Size: 346 mm² versus 123 mm²
• Transistor Density: 81.2 million per mm² versus 12.2 million per mm²
• Memory Size: 16 GB versus 1024 MB
• Memory Type: GDDR6 versus GDDR5
• Memory Bus Width: 256 bit versus 128 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 624.1 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s
• Memory Clock: 2438 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective) versus 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective)
• Shading Units: 2560 versus 512
• TMUs: 160 versus 32
• ROPs: 96 versus 16
• RT Cores: 40 versus none
• Pixel Rate: 236.1 GPixel/s versus 10.80 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 393.4 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s
• FP32: 25.18 TFLOPS versus 691.2 GFLOPS
• FP16: 25.18 TFLOPS (1:1) versus none recorded
• TDP: 200 W versus 32 W
• Slot Width: Dual-slot versus not recorded
• Power Connectors: 2x 8-pin versus none recorded
• Suggested PSU: 550 W versus none recorded
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 2.0 x16
• Display Outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C versus Portable Device Dependent
• DirectX Support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (11_1)
• Vulkan Support: 1.4 versus 1.2.170
• Production Status: Active versus End-of-life
• Release Date: 2025-09-17 versus 2012-04-23
• Predecessor: Navi II versus Vancouver
• Successor: Navi IV versus Solar System
• Chip name: Navi 32 versus Chelsea
• Generation: Navi III (RX 7000 series, codename Wheat Nas) versus London (HD 7700M)

The Verdict

The RX 7700 wins this comparison on every measurable metric in the database. Its 15852 average score is 2316 points higher than the HD 7700M's 13536, and it reaches the 58th percentile while the HD 7700M sits at the 54th. The 36.4x FP32 throughput advantage, combined with 16 GB of memory, modern DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and active production status, positions the RX 7700 as the clear choice for any workload that demands current-generation capabilities.

The HD 7770M, however, is not a failure in its own context. Its nearest rival data shows it leading the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT by 0.1% and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 by 0.2%, placing it at the top of its peer group. Its 32 W TDP makes it a low-power option, and its end-of-life status suggests it served its purpose in an older portable-device segment. But against the RX 7700, the gap is overwhelming. The RX 7700 offers 5x the shading units, 6x the ROPs, 9.8x the memory bandwidth, and 36.4x the FP32 compute. There is no recorded workload where the HD 7770M comes out ahead.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7700 wins in every benchmark category where data exists. Its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 261, DirectX 11 score of 186, DirectX 12 score of 96, and GPU Compute score of 10963 reflect a card that can handle both legacy and modern APIs. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2865 shows competence in demanding modern rendering workloads. The 16 GB GDDR6 memory pool and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth position it for high-resolution textures and large compute buffers. The 40 ray tracing cores give it a feature the HD 7770M cannot match. The 2x 8-pin power connectors and 550 W suggested PSU indicate a card designed for desktop-class performance.

The HD 7770M wins in exactly one domain: power efficiency in absolute terms. Its 32 W TDP is 168 W lower than the RX 7700's 200 W. That makes the HD 7770M suitable for portable devices and compact systems where power draw is the primary constraint. Its lack of recorded slot width, power connectors, and display outputs suggests it was designed for integration into laptops or other portable hardware where expansion options are limited anyway. For any user prioritizing minimal power consumption above all else, the HD 7770M has a clear rationale. For everything else, the RX 7700 is the answer.