AMD Radeon Pro 450 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M vs AMD Radeon Pro 450

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M and AMD Radeon Pro 450 are two mobile graphics solutions from different eras, with the GTX 780M built on Kepler architecture for high-end gaming laptops in 2013 and the Radeon Pro 450 using GCN 4.0 for professional Mac systems in 2016. The benchmark data shows a split decision: the GTX 780M wins 2 of 3 head-to-head tests with an average score of 11,261 versus the Radeon Pro 450's 10,804, yet the AMD card wins decisively in Metal performance. Both sit near the 50th percentile of all GPUs, separated by only 4.2% in average benchmark score, but their architectural differences create distinct workload strengths that matter more than the aggregate numbers suggest.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M averages 11,261 across all benchmarks, which is 4.2% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 450's 10,804. The GTX 780M also holds a higher percentile ranking at 50 versus 49 for the AMD card, though both sit essentially at the median of all GPUs.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Metal performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 450 wins the Geekbench Metal test by a substantial margin, scoring 12,893 versus the GTX 780M's 8,319, a 35.5% difference in AMD's favor. This is the largest performance gap in any single benchmark between the two cards.

Q: Which GPU performs better in OpenCL workloads?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M dominates OpenCL with a score of 12,769 compared to the Radeon Pro 450's 9,002, giving NVIDIA a 41.8% advantage. This represents the GTX 780M's largest winning margin across all tested workloads.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 450's Baffin chip achieves 24.4M transistors per mm² on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process, nearly double the GTX 780M's 12.0M transistors per mm² on TSMC's 28 nm node. Despite this density advantage, AMD's chip has fewer total transistors at 3,000 million versus NVIDIA's 3,540 million.

Q: Which GPU supports newer graphics API versions?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 450 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6, but AMD's Vulkan implementation is newer.

Q: How do memory specifications differ between the two cards?

A: The GTX 780M offers 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Radeon Pro 450 provides 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 81.28 GB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA's memory bandwidth is nearly double that of AMD's card.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M employs the GK104 chip built on Kepler architecture using TSMC's 28 nm process node. The die measures 294 mm² and contains 3,540 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 12.0M per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro 450 uses the Baffin chip based on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm node. AMD's die is significantly smaller at 123 mm² with 3,000 million transistors, yielding a much higher density of 24.4M per mm². The process node advantage allows AMD to pack more transistors per area, though NVIDIA's larger die still contains 540 million more total transistors.

Compute resource allocation differs substantially between the two architectures. The GTX 780M features 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Radeon Pro 450 is configured with 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs — roughly 40-60% of NVIDIA's counts depending on the unit type. These differences translate directly into peak throughput: the GTX 780M delivers 2.448 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 102.0 GTexel/s texture fill, and 25.50 GPixel/s pixel fill. The Radeon Pro 450 achieves 1,024.0 GFLOPS FP32 (also 1,024.0 GFLOPS FP16 with 1:1 ratio), 32.00 GTexel/s texture rate, and 12.80 GPixel/s pixel rate. NVIDIA leads in every throughput category, but AMD's FP16 capability is notable — the GTX 780M has no listed FP16 performance.

Clock behavior also differs. The GTX 780M has defined base and boost clocks of 771 MHz and 797 MHz respectively, while the Radeon Pro 450 lists no base or boost clock figures. Memory clocks are similar: NVIDIA runs at 1250 MHz with 5 Gbps effective, and AMD at 1270 MHz with 5.1 Gbps effective. However, the memory subsystem favors NVIDIA significantly — the GTX 780M's 256-bit bus and 4 GB capacity provide 160.0 GB/s bandwidth versus the Radeon Pro 450's 128-bit bus, 2 GB capacity, and 81.28 GB/s bandwidth.

Power and interface specifications reveal different design priorities. The GTX 780M carries a 122 W TDP with no power connectors required, while the Radeon Pro 450 draws only 35 W. Both use MXM modules, but NVIDIA connects via MXM-B (3.0) while AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Neither card lists a suggested PSU, and display outputs are portable-device dependent for both. Release dates are separated by over three years: the GTX 780M launched on 2013-05-10 while the Radeon Pro 450 arrived on 2016-10-29. Both are now end-of-life products, with the GTX 780M positioned between the GeForce 600M predecessor and GeForce 800M successor; AMD lists no predecessor or successor for the Radeon Pro 450.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear workload-based split rather than an overall winner. For OpenCL and Vulkan compute tasks, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M is the stronger choice — it leads by 41.8% in OpenCL and 20.7% in Vulkan. Users running general-purpose GPU compute or Vulkan-based applications should prefer the GTX 780M without hesitation. The card's 2.448 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 160.0 GB/s memory bandwidth provide the raw resources that these workloads exploit.

For Metal-based applications, the AMD Radeon Pro 450 is unequivocally superior. Its 12,893 Metal score versus 8,319 for the GTX 780M represents a 35.5% advantage — the single largest margin in any head-to-head test. This result aligns with the Radeon Pro 450's positioning as a Mac-oriented professional GPU, and the data confirms that Metal workloads see substantial benefit from the GCN 4.0 architecture. The Radeon Pro 450 also offers superior power efficiency at 35 W versus 122 W TDP, a critical consideration for thermally constrained mobile systems, but the GTX 780M's 4 GB memory capacity and 256-bit bus make it better suited for memory-intensive tasks.

The average benchmark scores tell a nuanced story: the GTX 780M's 11,261 average edges the Radeon Pro 450's 10,804 by 4.2%, yet the AMD card's nearest rival list includes the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 at 10,883 (0.7% higher) and the Quadro K2200 at 10,761 (0.4% lower), showing tight competition around its performance tier. The GTX 780M's nearest rivals are similarly close — the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 at 11,228 is just 0.3% behind, and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q at 11,088 sits 1.6% lower. Both cards occupy a narrow performance band near the 50th percentile, but they reach that band through very different architectural approaches.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M | AMD Radeon Pro 450 |

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

| Chip | GK104 | Baffin |

| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 4.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) |

| Transistors | 3,540 million | 3,000 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.0M / mm² | 24.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 771 MHz | — |

| Boost Clock | 797 MHz | — |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 81.28 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 640 |

| TMUs | 128 | 40 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 25.50 GPixel/s | 12.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 102.0 GTexel/s | 32.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.448 TFLOPS | 1,024.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | — | 1,024.0 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 122 W | 35 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2013-05-10 | 2016-10-29 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench Metal test delivers the most lopsided result in this comparison. The AMD Radeon Pro 450 scores 12,893 against the GTX 780M's 8,319, a 35.5% difference that represents AMD's only head-to-head victory. This margin is nearly as large as NVIDIA's best win (41.8% in OpenCL) and demonstrates that Metal performance is fundamentally architecture-dependent. The Radeon Pro 450's GCN 4.0 design with native FP16 support at 1:1 ratio likely contributes to this Metal advantage, as Metal workloads can leverage half-precision compute. The GTX 780M has no listed FP16 capability, which may explain its poor Metal showing despite higher raw FP32 throughput.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the tables turn dramatically. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M posts 12,769 versus the Radeon Pro 450's 9,002, giving NVIDIA a 41.8% lead — the largest delta in any test. This result aligns with the GTX 780M's substantial compute advantages: 2.448 TFLOPS FP32 versus 1,024.0 GFLOPS, 128 TMUs versus 40, and 160.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 81.28 GB/s. OpenCL workloads appear to scale with these traditional compute resources, and the GTX 780M's Kepler architecture with 1,536 shading units overwhelms the Radeon Pro 450's 640 shading units in this API.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows a closer contest but still favors NVIDIA. The GTX 780M scores 12,696 while the Radeon Pro 450 manages 10,518, a 20.7% NVIDIA advantage. This result is interesting because the Radeon Pro 450 supports the newer Vulkan 1.3 specification versus the GTX 780M's Vulkan 1.2.175, yet the older architecture still outperforms. The GTX 780M's superior memory bandwidth and texture throughput appear to outweigh the AMD card's newer API support. Notably, the GTX 780M's Vulkan score of 12,696 nearly matches its OpenCL score of 12,769, suggesting consistent compute performance across APIs, while the Radeon Pro 450 shows more variation: 12,893 in Metal, 10,518 in Vulkan, and 9,002 in OpenCL.

Aggregating the three tests, the GTX 780M wins 2-1 with an average benchmark score of 11,261 versus 10,804 for the Radeon Pro 450. The NVIDIA card's wins come with large margins (41.8% and 20.7%), while its loss is also substantial (35.5%). This pattern indicates that the GTX 780M is a more consistent performer across different compute APIs, while the Radeon Pro 450 has a pronounced strength in Metal that does not carry over to other frameworks. The percentile rankings confirm the overall parity — both cards sit within one percentile point of each other (50 versus 49) — but the workload-specific deltas show that choosing between these GPUs depends entirely on the target application environment.