AMD Radeon HD 7970 vs NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile Comparison

NVIDIA’s RTX A500 Mobile and AMD’s Radeon HD 7970 represent two distinct eras of GPU design, separated by a decade of architectural evolution. The data shows a clear overall winner in raw compute, but the older card still holds specific advantages in memory bandwidth and texture throughput. This analysis breaks down where each GPU excels, how their architectures differ, and what the benchmark results actually mean for real-world tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile is the decisive winner in compute-heavy workloads. It secures the only head-to-head benchmark victory, posting a 19.5% higher score in Geekbench OpenCL. This makes it the stronger choice for general-purpose compute, machine learning inference, and any task that leverages FP32 arithmetic or the dedicated tensor cores. Its 82nd percentile ranking among all GPUs, versus the HD 7970’s 79th, confirms its higher standing in the database’s overall performance hierarchy.

The AMD Radeon HD 7970, despite being older, wins in specific memory and texturing scenarios. It offers 264.0 GB/s of bandwidth compared to the RTX A500’s 96.00 GB/s, a massive 2.75x advantage. This makes it better suited for workloads that are bandwidth-bound, such as large data transfers, high-resolution texture streaming, or certain scientific simulations. Its texture rate of 118.4 GTexel/s also exceeds the RTX A500’s 98.37 GTexel/s, giving it an edge in traditional rasterization tasks that are fill-rate limited.

The RTX A500 Mobile counters with superior pixel throughput. Its 49.18 GPixel/s pixel rate outpaces the HD 7970’s 29.60 GPixel/s, meaning it can handle more pixels per second in modern rendering pipelines. For real-time graphics, especially at lower resolutions where pixel fill is the bottleneck, the newer card is faster. The HD 7970’s win is confined to legacy or specialized scenarios; the RTX A500 is the better all-rounder for contemporary software.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is vast. The RTX A500 Mobile uses the Ampere architecture, built on Samsung’s 8 nm process, while the HD 7970 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on TSMC’s 28 nm node. This process difference is the root of many performance deltas. The newer card packs 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, achieving a density of 43.5M / mm². The HD 7970 has 4,313 million transistors on a much larger 352 mm² die, yielding only 12.3M / mm². The RTX A500 is more efficient per square millimeter, which explains its dramatically lower power draw.

Shading unit counts are identical at 2048, and both have 32 ROPs, but the similarities end there. The RTX A500 has 64 TMUs, while the HD 7970 has 128, giving the older card double the texture mapping units. This directly explains the HD 7970’s higher texture rate. The RTX A500 compensates with dedicated hardware: 16 RT cores for ray tracing and 64 tensor cores for AI acceleration. The HD 7970 has neither, as it predates these features entirely.

Memory subsystems are polar opposites. The RTX A500 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, while the HD 7970 uses 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus. The wider bus gives the older card its bandwidth advantage, but the newer memory type offers higher effective clock speeds. The RTX A500’s memory runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective, while the HD 7970’s runs at 1375 MHz with 5.5 Gbps effective. The RTX A500 also supports PCIe 4.0 x8 versus the HD 7970’s PCIe 3.0 x16, a newer interface standard.

Power and physical design differ completely. The RTX A500 Mobile is an IGP with a 30 W TDP and no power connectors, designed for portable devices. The HD 7970 is a dual-slot card with a 250 W TDP, requiring a 6-pin and an 8-pin power connector, and a suggested 600 W PSU. The HD 7970 measures 275 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 38 mm in width, while the RTX A500 has no listed dimensions due to its mobile integration. The RTX A500 also supports newer API features, including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, versus the HD 7970’s DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The RTX A500 Mobile scores 41263, while the HD 7970 scores 34541. This is a 19.5% delta in favor of the NVIDIA part. This single test measures raw compute performance across a variety of workloads, including integer and floating-point operations. The RTX A500’s victory is substantial and consistent with its architectural advantages: newer process node, higher FP32 throughput, and dedicated tensor cores.

Looking at the RTX A500’s nearest rivals provides context for its score. It sits within 1.9% of the AMD Radeon Pro 580 (which scores 40318) and is 1.2% behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 (40063). Its closest match is the AMD Radeon Pro 575 at 39555, with a 0% delta. This places the RTX A500 in a competitive midrange segment, slightly above some older workstation cards. The HD 7970’s rivals show it is also competitive for its era. It is within 1% of the NVIDIA RTX A1000 (34207) and 0.5% behind the NVIDIA TITAN V (34355). It edges out the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB (34561) and NVIDIA A2 (34690) by small margins.

The FP32 figures reinforce the benchmark result. The RTX A500 delivers 6.296 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to the HD 7970’s 3.789 TFLOPS. This is a 66% advantage for the newer card, explaining its OpenCL lead. The RTX A500 also offers FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio (6.296 TFLOPS), while the HD 7970 has no listed FP16 capability. For workloads that support reduced precision, the RTX A500’s advantage grows even further. The HD 7970’s higher texture rate (118.4 GTexel/s vs 98.37 GTexel/s) and bandwidth (264.0 GB/s vs 96.00 GB/s) are its only numerical wins, but they do not translate into a benchmark victory in this database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile. It scores 41263 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the AMD Radeon HD 7970’s 34541, a 19.5% advantage. Its FP32 throughput of 6.296 TFLOPS also far exceeds the HD 7970’s 3.789 TFLOPS.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon HD 7970 have any advantages?

A: Yes, it has significantly higher memory bandwidth at 264.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s, and a higher texture rate at 118.4 GTexel/s versus 98.37 GTexel/s. These make it better for bandwidth-intensive and fill-rate-limited tasks.

Q: What are the key architectural differences?

A: The RTX A500 uses Ampere on an 8 nm process with 8,700 million transistors, while the HD 7970 uses GCN 1.0 on a 28 nm process with 4,313 million transistors. The RTX A500 has 64 TMUs, 16 RT cores, and 64 tensor cores; the HD 7970 has 128 TMUs and no RT or tensor cores.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The RTX A500 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The HD 7970 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 264.0 GB/s bandwidth. The HD 7970’s wider bus provides greater bandwidth, while the RTX A500’s newer memory type runs at higher effective speeds.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient?

A: The RTX A500 Mobile. Its TDP is 30 W, and it requires no power connectors, while the HD 7970 has a 250 W TDP and needs both a 6-pin and an 8-pin power connector with a 600 W suggested PSU.

Q: What is the release date gap?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 7970 was released on January 8, 2012, while the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile was released on March 21, 2022, a difference of over ten years.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile | AMD Radeon HD 7970 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Ampere | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 8 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 8,700 million | 4,313 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 352 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 43.5M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 3 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 264.0 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective | 1375 MHz, 5.5 Gbps effective |

| TMUs | 64 | 128 |

| RT Cores | 16 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 64 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 49.18 GPixel/s | 29.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 98.37 GTexel/s | 118.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 6.296 TFLOPS | 3.789 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 6.296 TFLOPS (1:1) | None |

| TDP | 30 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | None | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 275 mm x 111 mm x 38 mm |

| Launch MSRP | None | 549 USD |