NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M vs AMD Radeon HD 7570M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M and AMD Radeon HD 7570M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- Around 55% higher core clock speed: 775 MHz vs 500 MHz
- Around 44% higher boost clock speed: 938 MHz vs 650 MHz
- Around 3% higher texture fill rate: 12.4 GTexel / s vs 12 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
- Around 8% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 460 vs 427
- 2.4x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 2602 vs 1091
- 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 6.901 vs 3.109
- Around 76% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.587 vs 0.333
- Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1047 vs 905
- Around 43% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2570 vs 1797
- Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1047 vs 905
- Around 43% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2570 vs 1797
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 1 April 2013 vs 7 January 2012 |
Core clock speed | 775 MHz vs 500 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 938 MHz vs 650 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 12.4 GTexel / s vs 12 GTexel / s |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 1 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 460 vs 427 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2602 vs 1091 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 6.901 vs 3.109 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.587 vs 0.333 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1047 vs 905 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2570 vs 1797 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1047 vs 905 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2570 vs 1797 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 7570M
- 4.2x more pipelines: 400 vs 96
- 2x better floating-point performance: 480.0 gflops vs 240.0 gflops
- 2.5x lower typical power consumption: 13 Watt vs 33 Watt
- 2x more memory clock speed: 3200 MHz vs 1600 MHz
- Around 60% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 190 vs 119
- Around 36% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 199.164 vs 146.913
- Around 4% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 10.489 vs 10.121
- Around 88% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 42.722 vs 22.755
- Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2352 vs 2035
- Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2352 vs 2035
Specifications (specs) | |
Pipelines | 400 vs 96 |
Floating-point performance | 480.0 gflops vs 240.0 gflops |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 13 Watt vs 33 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 3200 MHz vs 1600 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 190 vs 119 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 199.164 vs 146.913 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 10.489 vs 10.121 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 42.722 vs 22.755 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2352 vs 2035 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2352 vs 2035 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 7570M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M | AMD Radeon HD 7570M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 460 | 427 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 119 | 190 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2602 | 1091 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 6.901 | 3.109 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 146.913 | 199.164 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.587 | 0.333 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 10.121 | 10.489 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 22.755 | 42.722 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1047 | 905 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2570 | 1797 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2035 | 2352 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1047 | 905 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2570 | 1797 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2035 | 2352 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M | AMD Radeon HD 7570M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | TeraScale 2 |
Code name | GF117 | Thames |
Launch date | 1 April 2013 | 7 January 2012 |
Place in performance rating | 1444 | 1447 |
Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 938 MHz | 650 MHz |
Core clock speed | 775 MHz | 500 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 240.0 gflops | 480.0 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 96 | 400 |
Texture fill rate | 12.4 GTexel / s | 12 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt | 13 Watt |
Transistor count | 585 million | 716 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI | ||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | Up to 2560x1600 | |
eDP 1.2 signal support | Up to 2560x1600 | |
HDCP content protection | ||
HDMI | ||
LVDS signal support | Up to 1920x1200 | |
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming | ||
VGA аnalog display support | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 2.0 | |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Laptop size | medium sized | medium sized |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 API | 11.2 (11_0) |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 12.8 GB / s | 25.6 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | 3200 MHz |
Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR5 / DDR3 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Standard memory configuration | DDR3 | |
Technologies |
||
Blu-Ray 3D Support | ||
CUDA | ||
Direct Compute | ||
FXAA | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus |