GeForce GTX 295 vs Radeon Pro 450
When choosing between GeForce GTX 295 and Radeon Pro 450, it is worth examining the specifications of the models in detail. Do they meet the recommended requirements of modern games and software? Storage capacity, form factor, TDP, available ports, warranty and manufacturer support are all important. For example, the size of a PC case can limit the maximum thickness and length of the card. Often, instead of the factory overclocked card and RGB backlight, it is better to choose a reference model with a more efficient GPU. And make sure that your current power supply unit has the correct connection pins (using adapters is not recommended). This GPUs compare tool is meant to help you to choose the best graphics card for your build. Let's find out the difference between GeForce GTX 295 and Radeon Pro 450.
GeForce GTX 295
Radeon Pro 450 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Radeon Pro 450 is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with Radeon Pro 450 here:
Main Specs
GeForce GTX 295 | Radeon Pro 450 | |
Power consumption (TDP) | 289 Watt | 35 Watt |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin & 8-pin | |
Memory type | GDDR3 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 1792 MB | 2 GB |
Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI | No outputs |
Check Price |
- GeForce GTX 295 has 725% more power consumption, than Radeon Pro 450.
- GeForce GTX 295 is connected by PCIe 2.0 x16, and Radeon Pro 450 uses PCIe 3.0 x8 interface.
- GeForce GTX 295 has 1790 GB more memory, than Radeon Pro 450.
- GeForce GTX 295 is used in Desktops, and Radeon Pro 450 - in Mobile workstations.
- GeForce GTX 295 is build with Tesla 2.0 architecture, and Radeon Pro 450 - with Polaris.
- Core clock speed of GeForce GTX 295 is 442 MHz higher, than Radeon Pro 450.
- GeForce GTX 295 is manufactured by 55 nm process technology, and Radeon Pro 450 - by 14 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Radeon Pro 450 is 4081 MHz higher, than GeForce GTX 295.
Game benchmarks
high / 1080p | 3−4 | 14−16 |
ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 8−9 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 3−4 |
low / 720p | 14−16 | 27−30 |
medium / 1080p | 5−6 | 16−18 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 183% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
high / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 18−20 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 5−6 |
4K / 2160p | − | 5−6 |
low / 720p | 18−20 | 45−50 |
medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 24−27 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in Battlefield 5 is 172% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
high / 1080p | 30−35 | − |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
GeForce GTX 295 and Radeon Pro 450 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
low / 768p | 120−130 | 200−210 |
medium / 768p | 90−95 | 170−180 |
ultra / 1080p | 40−45 | 90−95 |
QHD / 1440p | 24−27 | 50−55 |
4K / 2160p | 18−20 | 30−33 |
high / 768p | 65−70 | 130−140 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 85% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 80−85 | 55−60 |
ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 35−40 |
medium / 1080p | 40−45 | 45−50 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 2% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 75−80 | 100−110 |
medium / 768p | 50−55 | 90−95 |
ultra / 1080p | 27−30 | 60−65 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in Dota 2 is 65% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
high / 1080p | 5−6 | 16−18 |
ultra / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
4K / 2160p | 2−3 | 5−6 |
low / 720p | 14−16 | 35−40 |
medium / 1080p | 6−7 | 18−20 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in Far Cry 5 is 171% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
high / 1080p | 12−14 | 21−24 |
ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 18−20 |
QHD / 1440p | − | 16−18 |
low / 720p | 50−55 | 90−95 |
medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 45−50 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in Fortnite is 104% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
high / 1080p | 7−8 | 24−27 |
ultra / 1080p | − | 18−20 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 8−9 |
low / 720p | 20−22 | 45−50 |
medium / 1080p | 9−10 | 27−30 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in Forza Horizon 4 is 175% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 45−50 | 80−85 |
medium / 768p | − | 70−75 |
high / 1080p | 8−9 | 27−30 |
ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 10−12 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 2−3 |
medium / 720p | 40−45 | − |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in Grand Theft Auto V is 100% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
high / 1080p | 3−4 | 9−10 |
ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 7−8 |
4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 2−3 |
low / 720p | 8−9 | 27−30 |
medium / 1080p | 4−5 | 12−14 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in Metro Exodus is 250% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 85−90 | 110−120 |
high / 1080p | 85−90 | − |
ultra / 1080p | 80−85 | 100−110 |
medium / 1080p | 85−90 | 100−110 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in Minecraft is 27% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
high / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 16−18 |
low / 720p | 27−30 | 50−55 |
medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 21−24 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 66% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
high / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 9−10 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 8−9 | 24−27 |
medium / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 112% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 16−18 | 50−55 |
medium / 768p | 12−14 | 30−35 |
high / 1080p | 6−7 | 16−18 |
ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 10−11 |
4K / 2160p | − | 8−9 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 180% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 70−75 | 100−105 |
medium / 768p | 35−40 | 60−65 |
ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 30−35 |
high / 768p | 30−35 | 50−55 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 450 in World of Tanks is 58% more, than GeForce GTX 295. |
Full Specs
GeForce GTX 295 | Radeon Pro 450 | |
Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Polaris |
Code name | GT200B | Polaris 11 |
Type | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
Release date | 8 January 2009 | 27 October 2016 |
Pipelines | 240 | 640 |
Core clock speed | 1242 MHz | 800 MHz |
Transistor count | 1,400 million | 3,000 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 14 nm |
Texture fill rate | 92.2 billion/sec | 32.00 |
Floating-point performance | 2x 596.2 gflops | 1,024 gflops |
Length | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) | |
Memory bus width | 896 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 999 MHz | 5080 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 223.8 GB/s | 81.28 GB/s |
Shared memory | - | |
DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 (12_0) |
Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.4 |
OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.0 |
Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
CUDA | + | |
FreeSync | + | |
CUDA cores | 480 | |
Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
SLI options | + | |
Multi monitor support | + | |
HDMI | + | |
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | |
Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 127 Mh/s | |
Laptop size | large | |
CUDA cores per GPU | 240 | |
Standard memory config per GPU | 896 MB | |
Memory interface width per GPU | 448 Bit | |
High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR) | 128bit | |
Check Price |