GeForce GTX 470M vs GeForce GTX 670MX

NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 470M

2010Core: 535 MHz
Similar parts
·······
VS
NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 670MX

2012Core: 600 MHz
Similar parts
·······

GeForce GTX 470M vs GeForce GTX 670MX Performance Spectrum

About G3D Mark

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

GeForce GTX 470M vs GeForce GTX 670MX FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce GTX 470M vs GeForce GTX 670MX: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GeForce GTX 470M

2010

Why buy it

  • Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

  • Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 670MX across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
  • Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 3 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
  • 2010 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

GeForce GTX 670MX

2012

Why buy it

  • 25.7% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
  • 100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (3 GB vs 2 GB).
  • More future proof: Kepler (2012−2018) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

  • 2012 hardware with 3 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
GeForce GTX 670MX is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 25.7% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 1.3% in PassMark G3D (1,978 vs 1,953), so the answer here is pretty clean.
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
GeForce GTX 470M is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond because it comes out ahead on the available hardware-headroom signals for this matchup.
Which GPU is the better buy today?
GeForce GTX 670MX makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, GeForce GTX 670MX is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, GeForce GTX 470M has the stronger long-term case.

GeForce GTX 470M vs GeForce GTX 670MX Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 470M

The GeForce GTX 470M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 3 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 535 MHz. It has 288 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,953 points.

NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 670MX

The GeForce GTX 670MX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 1 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 600 MHz. It has 960 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,978 points.

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 470M scores 1,953 and the GeForce GTX 670MX reaches 1,978 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 470M is built on Fermi while the GeForce GTX 670MX uses Kepler, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 288 (GeForce GTX 470M) vs 960 (GeForce GTX 670MX). Raw compute: 0.6163 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 470M) vs 1.154 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 670MX).

FeatureGeForce GTX 470MGeForce GTX 670MX
G3D Mark Score
1,953
1,978+1%
Architecture
Fermi
Kepler
Process Node
40 nm
28 nm
Shading Units
288
960+233%
Compute (TFLOPS)
0.6163 TFLOPS
1.154 TFLOPS+87%
ROPs
24
24
TMUs
48
80+67%
L1 Cache
384 KB+380%
80 KB
L2 Cache
384 KB
384 KB

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureGeForce GTX 470MGeForce GTX 670MX
Upscaling Tech
Upscaling support
Upscaling support
Frame Generation
Not Supported
Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction
No
No
Low Latency
NVIDIA Reflex
NVIDIA Reflex
💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 470M has 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 670MX carries 3 GB. GeForce GTX 670MX gives you 100% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 470M and 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 670MX.

FeatureGeForce GTX 470MGeForce GTX 670MX
VRAM Capacity
1.5 GB
3 GB+100%
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth
Unknown
Unknown
Bus Width
128-bit
128-bit
L2 Cache
384 KB
384 KB
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTX 470M) vs 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTX 670MX). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.2. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.

FeatureGeForce GTX 470MGeForce GTX 670MX
DirectX
12 (11_0)
12 (11_0)
Vulkan
1.2
1.2
OpenGL
4.6+10%
4.2
Max Displays
2
4+100%
🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: PureVideo HD VP4 (GeForce GTX 470M) vs NVENC 1st Gen (GeForce GTX 670MX). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP4 vs PureVideo HD VP5. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 ASP (GeForce GTX 470M) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 ASP (GeForce GTX 670MX).

FeatureGeForce GTX 470MGeForce GTX 670MX
Encoder
PureVideo HD VP4
NVENC 1st Gen
Decoder
PureVideo HD VP4
PureVideo HD VP5
Codecs
H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 ASP
H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 ASP
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 470M draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 670MX's 75W — a 0% difference. The GeForce GTX 670MX is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 470M) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 670MX). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs 1x 6-pin. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 85°C.

FeatureGeForce GTX 470MGeForce GTX 670MX
TDP
75W
75W
Recommended PSU
350W
350W
Power Connector
1x 6-pin
1x 6-pin
Slots
0
0
Temp (Load)
85°C
85°C
Perf/Watt
26.0
26.4+2%