Component comparison
GeForce MX450 vs GeForce RTX 2070
GeForce MX450 vs GeForce RTX 2070 — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce MX450
- + Release year (+2)
- + Die size (mm²) (+245 mm²)
- + Energy efficiency (+10.5)
B
GeForce RTX 2070
- + VRAM (GB) (+6 GB)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+368 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+192 bit)
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+55 W)
- + Transistors (M) (+6,100M)
- + CUDA cores (+1408)
- + TMUs (+80)
- + ROPs (+32)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+2.23 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+53.30 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+145.10 GTexel/s)
- + PassMark (overall) (+12349)
- + 3DMark Time Spy (+4761)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+18461)
- + Geekbench OpenCL (+59896)
- + Geekbench Vulkan (+56087)
- + Normalized score (+25.8)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce MX450
|
Component B
GeForce RTX 2070
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2020 (+2) | 2018 |
| VRAM (GB) | 2 GB | 8 GB (+6 GB) |
| Memory type | GDDR5, GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 1250 MHz | — |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 80 GB/s | 448 GB/s (+368 GB/s) |
| Memory bus (bit) | 64 bit | 256 bit (+192 bit) |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 25 W | 80 W (+55 W) |
| Lithography (nm) | 12 nm | 12 nm |
| Transistors (M) | 4,700M | 10,800M (+6,100M) |
| Die size (mm²) | 200 mm² (+245 mm²) | 445 mm² |
| Base clock (MHz) | 1395 MHz | — |
| Boost clock (MHz) | 1575 MHz | — |
| CUDA cores | 896 | 2,304 (+1408) |
| TMUs | 64 | 144 (+80) |
| ROPs | 32 | 64 (+32) |
| RT cores | — | 36 |
| Tensor cores | — | 288 |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 3.23 TFLOPS | 5.46 TFLOPS (+2.23 TFLOPS) |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 50.40 GPixel/s | 103.70 GPixel/s (+53.30 GPixel/s) |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 88.20 GTexel/s | 233.30 GTexel/s (+145.10 GTexel/s) |
| Energy efficiency | 27.6 (+10.5) | 17.0 |
| PassMark (overall) | 3,714 | 16,063 (+12349) |
| 3DMark Time Spy | 1,900 | 6,661 (+4761) |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 4,725 | 23,186 (+18461) |
| Geekbench OpenCL | 28,541 | 88,437 (+59896) |
| Geekbench Vulkan | 27,321 | 83,408 (+56087) |
| Normalized score | 44.7 | 70.5 (+25.8) |
Only in component B
DLSS
In both
CUDA
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce MX450 | GeForce RTX 2070 | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battlefield 5 | 49 FPS | 92 FPS | 87.8% (B) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 88 FPS | 150 FPS | 70.5% (B) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 32 FPS | 60 FPS | 87.5% (B) |
| Dota 2 | 88 FPS | 127 FPS | 44.3% (B) |
| Far Cry 5 | 34 FPS | 103 FPS | 202.9% (B) |
| Fortnite | 61 FPS | 122 FPS | 100% (B) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35 FPS | 121 FPS | 245.7% (B) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 34 FPS | 85 FPS | 150% (B) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Metro Exodus | 10 FPS | 61 FPS | 510% (B) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 16 FPS | 65 FPS | 306.3% (B) |
| The Witcher 3 | 33 FPS | 122 FPS | 269.7% (B) |
| Valorant | 85 FPS | 180 FPS | 111.8% (B) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 2070 wins 17 of the comparable criteria.
The choice depends on your use case.
🤔 How to choose
Universal advice for any use case.
- Reliability vs price: reliability (median 50) ↔ price (median 385.1).
- Weight vs CPU: mobility (median 48) ↔ overall performance (median 49.8).
- Upgradeability vs battery: upgradability (median 50) ↔ battery life (median 2.8).