GeForce RTX 4070 Ti vs Radeon Pro 450
GeForce RTX 4070 Ti
Popular choices:
Radeon Pro 450
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce RTX 4070 Ti
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is significantly newer (2023 vs 2016). The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon Pro 450 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1059.7% higher G3D Mark score and 500% more VRAM (12 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon Pro 450.
| Insight | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti | Radeon Pro 450 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1059.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1059.7%) |
| Longevity | 🏆Elite Architecture (Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) / 4nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (12 GB) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (285mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon Pro 450 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $40 versus $590 for the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti, it costs 93% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 27.2% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti | Radeon Pro 450 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+27.2%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($590) | ✅More affordable ($40) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce RTX 4070 Ti and Radeon Pro 450
GeForce RTX 4070 Ti
The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 3 2023. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 2310 MHz to 2610 MHz. It has 7680 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 285W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 60 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 31,578 points. Launch price was $799.
Radeon Pro 450
The Radeon Pro 450 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 30 2016. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 800 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,723 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti scores 31,578 versus the Radeon Pro 450's 2,723 — the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti leads by 1059.7%. The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is built on Ada Lovelace while the Radeon Pro 450 uses GCN 4.0, both on 4 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 7,680 (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti) vs 640 (Radeon Pro 450). Raw compute: 40.09 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti) vs 1.024 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro 450).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti | Radeon Pro 450 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 31,578+1060% | 2,723 |
| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 4 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 7680+1100% | 640 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 40.09 TFLOPS+3815% | 1.024 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 80+400% | 16 |
| TMUs | 240+500% | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 7.5 MB+4588% | 0.16 MB |
| L2 Cache | 48 MB+4700% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is support for DLSS 3 Frame Gen. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The Radeon Pro 450 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon Pro 450 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti | Radeon Pro 450 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 3.5 | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | DLSS 3.0 (Native) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | Yes (DLSS 3.5) | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti comes with 12 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro 450 has 2 GB. The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti offers 500% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 192-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 48 MB (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti) vs 1 MB (Radeon Pro 450) — the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti | Radeon Pro 450 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 12 GB+500% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6X | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 192-bit+200% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 48 MB+4700% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti) vs 12_0 (Radeon Pro 450). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 0.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti | Radeon Pro 450 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12_0 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (8th Gen) (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti) vs VCE 3.4 (Radeon Pro 450). Decoder: NVDEC (5th Gen) vs UVD 6.3.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti | Radeon Pro 450 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (8th Gen) | VCE 3.4 |
| Decoder | NVDEC (5th Gen) | UVD 6.3 |
| Codecs | AV1,H.264,H.265,VP9 | — |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti draws 285W versus the Radeon Pro 450's 35W — a 156.3% difference. The Radeon Pro 450 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 700W (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti) vs 350W (Radeon Pro 450). Power connectors: 8-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 285mm vs 1mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti | Radeon Pro 450 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 285W | 35W-88% |
| Recommended PSU | 700W | 350W-50% |
| Power Connector | 8-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 285mm | 1mm |
| Height | 112mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 110.8+42% | 77.8 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti launched at $799 MSRP and currently averages $590, while the Radeon Pro 450 launched at $0 and now averages $40. The Radeon Pro 450 costs 93.2% less ($550 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 53.5 (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti) vs 68.1 (Radeon Pro 450) — the Radeon Pro 450 offers 27.3% better value. The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2016).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti | Radeon Pro 450 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $799 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $590 | $40-93% |
| Performance per Dollar | 53.5 | 68.1+27% |
| Codename | AD104 | Baffin |
| Release | January 3 2023 | October 30 2016 |
| Ranking | #11 | #612 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce RTX 4070 Ti and Radeon Pro 450
