Component comparison
GeForce RTX 3070 Ti vs GeForce MX450
GeForce RTX 3070 Ti vs GeForce MX450 — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce RTX 3070 Ti
- + Release year (+2)
- + VRAM (GB) (+6 GB)
- + Memory clock (MHz) (+500 MHz)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+528 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+192 bit)
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+90 W)
- + Lithography (nm) (-4 nm)
- + Transistors (M) (+12,700M)
- + CUDA cores (+5248)
- + TMUs (+128)
- + ROPs (+64)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+18.52 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+119.50 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+251.60 GTexel/s)
- + Energy efficiency (+0.4)
- + PassMark (overall) (+13589)
- + 3DMark Time Spy (+8562)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+23051)
- + Normalized score (+18.9)
B
GeForce MX450
- + Die size (mm²) (+192 mm²)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce RTX 3070 Ti
|
Component B
GeForce MX450
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2022 (+2) | 2020 |
| VRAM (GB) | 8 GB (+6 GB) | 2 GB |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5, GDDR6 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 1750 MHz (+500 MHz) | 1250 MHz |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 608 GB/s (+528 GB/s) | 80 GB/s |
| Memory bus (bit) | 256 bit (+192 bit) | 64 bit |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 115 W (+90 W) | 25 W |
| Lithography (nm) | 8 nm (-4 nm) | 12 nm |
| Transistors (M) | 17,400M (+12,700M) | 4,700M |
| Die size (mm²) | 392 mm² | 200 mm² (+192 mm²) |
| Base clock (MHz) | — | 1395 MHz |
| Boost clock (MHz) | — | 1575 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 6,144 (+5248) | 896 |
| TMUs | 192 (+128) | 64 |
| ROPs | 96 (+64) | 32 |
| RT cores | 48 | — |
| Tensor cores | 192 | — |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 21.75 TFLOPS (+18.52 TFLOPS) | 3.23 TFLOPS |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 169.90 GPixel/s (+119.50 GPixel/s) | 50.40 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 339.80 GTexel/s (+251.60 GTexel/s) | 88.20 GTexel/s |
| Energy efficiency | 27.9 (+0.4) | 27.6 |
| PassMark (overall) | 17,303 (+13589) | 3,714 |
| 3DMark Time Spy | 10,462 (+8562) | 1,900 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 27,776 (+23051) | 4,725 |
| Geekbench OpenCL | — | 28,541 |
| Geekbench Vulkan | — | 27,321 |
| Normalized score | 63.6 (+18.9) | 44.7 |
Only in component A
DLSS
ReBAR
ray_tracing
In both
CUDA
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce RTX 3070 Ti | GeForce MX450 | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battlefield 5 | 130 FPS | 49 FPS | +165.3% (A) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 220 FPS | 88 FPS | +150% (A) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 129 FPS | 32 FPS | +303.1% (A) |
| Dota 2 | 146 FPS | 88 FPS | +65.9% (A) |
| Far Cry 5 | 138 FPS | 34 FPS | +305.9% (A) |
| Fortnite | 180 FPS | 61 FPS | +195.1% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 160 FPS | 35 FPS | +357.1% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 210 FPS | 34 FPS | +517.6% (A) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Metro Exodus | 95 FPS | 10 FPS | +850% (A) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 110 FPS | 16 FPS | +587.5% (A) |
| The Witcher 3 | 188 FPS | 33 FPS | +469.7% (A) |
| Valorant | 230 FPS | 85 FPS | +170.6% (A) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 3070 Ti wins 19 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).