AMD Radeon RX 470 vs AMD Radeon RX 7800M Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 470 and AMD Radeon RX 7800M represent two distinct eras of AMD mobile and desktop graphics. The RX 470, a 2016 desktop part built on a 14 nm process, and the RX 7800M, a 2024 mobile chip on a 5 nm node, are separated by eight years of architectural evolution. Benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap, with the RX 7800M winning all three head-to-head tests, but the RX 470 still holds a place in the database’s percentile rankings.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result comes from the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. The RX 7800M scores 2994, while the RX 470 manages only 842. This represents a delta of -71.9%, meaning the RX 470 trails by nearly three-quarters of a point. In practical terms, the RX 7800M is roughly 3.5 times faster in this modern DirectX 12 workload, a margin that reflects the massive architectural leap from GCN 4.0 to RDNA 3.0. The RX 7800M’s 60 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support give it a fundamental advantage in geometry-heavy scenes, while the RX 470’s older 12_0 feature level limits its ability to process the same workload efficiently.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7800M again dominates with a score of 120778, compared to the RX 470’s 33568. The delta here is -72.2%, the largest margin across all tests. This compute-heavy benchmark highlights the raw throughput difference: the RX 7800M delivers 35.87 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus the RX 470’s 4.940 TFLOPS. That is a 7.2x theoretical compute advantage, and the benchmark result confirms that the newer architecture scales accordingly. The RX 7800M’s 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs dwarf the RX 470’s 2048 shaders, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, enabling far greater parallel execution.

The Vulkan test shows a slightly narrower gap. The RX 7800M scores 126668, while the RX 470 reaches 39884, yielding a delta of -68.5%. This is the smallest relative difference of the three benchmarks, suggesting that the RX 470’s Vulkan 1.3 driver implementation is relatively efficient for its era. However, the absolute score is still nearly 3.2 times lower. The RX 7800M’s Vulkan 1.4 support, combined with its higher boost clock of 2335 MHz versus the RX 470’s 1206 MHz, allows it to extract more performance from the API’s lower-level hardware access.

Across all head-to-head tests, the RX 7800M wins 3 out of 3. The RX 470 records zero wins. The average benchmark score in the database tells a similar story: the RX 470 averages 28996, while the RX 7800M averages 27883. Interestingly, this puts the RX 470 slightly ahead in aggregate database scores, but that is skewed by the RX 470’s inclusion of a Geekbench Metal result (41690) which the RX 7800M lacks. The RX 7800M has additional PassMark results (DirectX 9-12, G2D, G3D, GPU Compute) that the RX 470 does not have, so direct comparison of aggregate scores is not apples-to-apples. The head-to-head tests with matching workloads are the reliable indicator.

Looking at nearest rivals, the RX 470 sits at the 74th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 28996. Its closest competitor is the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, which scores 28874, a delta of 0.4% in the RX 470’s favor. The RX 470 also edges out the Intel Arc A370M (-0.6%), the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH (-0.7%), and the AMD FirePro W8000 (-0.7%). This suggests that despite its age, the RX 470 remains competitive in the database’s overall scoring against a cluster of mid-range mobile and workstation parts.

The RX 7800M, by contrast, holds the 73rd percentile, just one point below the RX 470. Its average score of 27883 places it near the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (27839, +0.2%), the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X (27973, -0.3%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (28020, -0.5%), and the AMD FirePro S7150 (28117, -0.8%). The RX 7800M’s percentile ranking is lower than the RX 470’s, which is counterintuitive given its head-to-head dominance. This discrepancy arises because the database’s average score includes a broader set of benchmarks, and the RX 7800M’s PassMark DirectX 9 and 10 scores (174 and 99, respectively) are relatively weak due to driver overhead or architectural prioritization of modern APIs.

The Verdict

From the data, the AMD Radeon RX 7800M is the clear choice for any workload that leverages modern graphics APIs. It wins every head-to-head benchmark by margins of 68.5% to 72.2%, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2994 versus 842 shows it handles DirectX 12 Ultimate titles far better. The RX 7800M’s 12 GB of GDDR6 memory with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth also provides a substantial buffer for high-resolution textures, whereas the RX 470’s 4 GB GDDR5 with 211.2 GB/s may hit capacity limits in contemporary games. If the task involves ray tracing, the RX 7800M’s 60 RT cores are indispensable; the RX 470 has none.

The RX 470 is not without merit. Its 74th percentile ranking is higher than the RX 7800M’s 73rd, and its average benchmark score of 28996 exceeds the RX 7800M’s 27883. For legacy applications that rely on OpenCL or older DirectX versions, the RX 470’s 14 nm GCN architecture retains reasonable performance. It also requires a 300 W suggested PSU and a single 6-pin connector, whereas the RX 7800M is an IGP with no power connectors and a 180 W TDP, making it suited for portable devices. However, the RX 470 is end-of-life, while the RX 7800M is active.

Strictly from the numbers, the RX 7800M is the superior product for modern gaming and compute. Its 35.87 TFLOPS FP32, 224.2 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 560.4 GTexel/s texture rate are orders of magnitude above the RX 470’s 4.940 TFLOPS, 38.59 GPixel/s, and 154.4 GTexel/s. The RX 470’s only advantage is its higher percentile ranking, but that is an artifact of benchmark mix. Users prioritizing backward compatibility with older software might consider the RX 470, but those seeking current performance should select the RX 7800M.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7800M wins with a score of 2994, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 470’s 842, a delta of -71.9%.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon RX 470 have a higher percentile ranking than the RX 7800M?

A: Yes. The RX 470 ranks in the 74th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 7800M ranks in the 73rd percentile.

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

A: The RX 470 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 211.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7800M has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the RX 7800M support ray tracing hardware?

A: Yes, the RX 7800M includes 60 ray tracing cores. The RX 470 has no ray tracing cores.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RX 7800M has a boost clock of 2335 MHz, while the RX 470 boosts to 1206 MHz.

Q: What is the process node for each GPU?

A: The RX 470 is built on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries, while the RX 7800M uses a 5 nm process by TSMC.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The RX 470 uses a 14 nm process with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, while the RX 7800M uses a 5 nm process with 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die. Transistor density is 24.6M/mm² for the RX 470 and 81.2M/mm² for the RX 7800M. Clock speeds differ significantly: the RX 470 has a base clock of 926 MHz and a boost of 1206 MHz, while the RX 7800M has a base of 1295 MHz, a boost of 2335 MHz, and a game clock of 2145 MHz. Memory clocks are 1650 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) for the RX 470 and 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the RX 7800M.

Memory capacity and type diverge: 4 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus versus 12 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. Bandwidth is 211.2 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s. Compute units scale from 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs on the RX 470 to 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs on the RX 7800M. The RX 7800M adds 60 RT cores. Pixel rate is 38.59 GPixel/s versus 224.2 GPixel/s, texture rate is 154.4 GTexel/s versus 560.4 GTexel/s, and FP32 is 4.940 TFLOPS versus 35.87 TFLOPS. TDP is 120 W versus 180 W. The RX 470 is dual-slot with a 1x 6-pin connector and a 300 W suggested PSU; the RX 7800M is IGP with no connectors and no suggested PSU. Bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a for the RX 470, versus portable device dependent for the RX 7800M. DirectX support is 12 (12_0) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2), and Vulkan is 1.3 versus 1.4.

Architecture Differences

The RX 470 is built on GCN 4.0 architecture, codenamed Ellesmere, part of the Arctic Islands (RX 400) generation. It uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The RX 7800M is built on RDNA 3.0, codenamed Wheat Nas, part of the Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) generation. It uses a 5 nm process from TSMC. The RX 470 has no ray tracing cores; the RX 7800M has 60. The RX 470’s FP16 performance is 4.940 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio with FP32), while the RX 7800M also has a 1:1 FP16/FP32 ratio at 35.87 TFLOPS. The RX 7800M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the RX 470 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. The RX 470’s predecessor is Pirate Islands and successor is Polaris; the RX 7800M’s predecessor is Polaris Mobile and it has no successor. The RX 470 was released in August 2016 and is end-of-life; the RX 7800M was released in September 2024 and is active.