AMD Radeon 620 vs AMD Radeon E8860
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon 620 and AMD Radeon E8860 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon 620
- Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- Around 27% higher core clock speed: 730 MHz vs 575 MHz
- Around 64% higher boost clock speed: 1024 MHz vs 625 MHz
- 983.2x more texture fill rate: 24.58 GTexel/s vs 25 GTexel / s
- Around 60% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1991 vs 1246
- Around 60% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1991 vs 1246
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 13 May 2019 vs 25 January 2014 |
Core clock speed | 730 MHz vs 575 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1024 MHz vs 625 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 24.58 GTexel/s vs 25 GTexel / s |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1991 vs 1246 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1991 vs 1246 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon E8860
- Around 67% higher pipelines: 640 vs 384
- Around 35% lower typical power consumption: 37 Watt vs 50 Watt
- 5x more memory clock speed: 4500 MHz vs 900 MHz (1800 MHz effective)
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1655 vs 694
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1655 vs 694
- 3.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 4345 vs 1116
- 3.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 4345 vs 1116
- 2.1x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 436 vs 205
- Around 88% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1686 vs 897
Specifications (specs) | |
Pipelines | 640 vs 384 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 37 Watt vs 50 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 4500 MHz vs 900 MHz (1800 MHz effective) |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1655 vs 694 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1655 vs 694 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 4345 vs 1116 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 4345 vs 1116 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 436 vs 205 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1686 vs 897 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon 620
GPU 2: AMD Radeon E8860
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon 620 | AMD Radeon E8860 |
---|---|---|
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1991 | 1246 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1991 | 1246 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 694 | 1655 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 694 | 1655 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1116 | 4345 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1116 | 4345 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 205 | 436 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 897 | 1686 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 26300 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 20.395 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 529.248 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.683 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.803 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 47.86 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon 620 | AMD Radeon E8860 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | Polaris 24 | Venus |
Launch date | 13 May 2019 | 25 January 2014 |
Place in performance rating | 1248 | 1020 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1024 MHz | 625 MHz |
Compute units | 6 | |
Core clock speed | 730 MHz | 575 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 49.15 GFLOPS (1:16) | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 786.4 GFLOPS (1:1) | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 786.4 GFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 384 | 640 |
Pixel fill rate | 8.192 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 24.58 GTexel/s | 25 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 37 Watt |
Transistor count | 1550 million | 1,500 million |
Floating-point performance | 800.0 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
Width | IGP | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_1) |
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 6.3 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 14.40 GB/s | 72 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 64 bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 900 MHz (1800 MHz effective) | 4500 MHz |
Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |