AMD Radeon 620 vs AMD Radeon Vega 3
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon 620 and AMD Radeon Vega 3 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon 620
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- 2.4x more core clock speed: 730 MHz vs 300 MHz
- Around 2% higher boost clock speed: 1024 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- 2048.3x more texture fill rate: 24.58 GTexel/s vs 12 GTexel / s
- 2x more pipelines: 384 vs 192
- Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1991 vs 1412
- Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1991 vs 1412
- Around 4% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 923 vs 890
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 13 May 2019 vs 13 February 2018 |
Core clock speed | 730 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1024 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 24.58 GTexel/s vs 12 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 384 vs 192 |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1991 vs 1412 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1991 vs 1412 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 923 vs 890 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Vega 3
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 3.3x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 50 Watt
- 3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2111 vs 694
- 3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2111 vs 694
- 2.8x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3174 vs 1116
- 2.8x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3174 vs 1116
- Around 50% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 304 vs 203
Specifications (specs) | |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 50 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2111 vs 694 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2111 vs 694 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3174 vs 1116 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3174 vs 1116 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 304 vs 203 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon 620
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Vega 3
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 Vega 3 |
---|---|---|
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1991 | 1412 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1991 | 1412 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 694 | 2111 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 694 | 2111 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1116 | 3174 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1116 | 3174 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 203 | 304 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 923 | 890 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3950 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 10.049 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 183.156 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.75 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 18.933 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 60.006 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 418 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon 620 | AMD Radeon Vega 3 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 5.0 |
Code name | Polaris 24 | Owl |
Launch date | 13 May 2019 | 13 February 2018 |
Place in performance rating | 1260 | 1261 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1024 MHz | 1000 MHz |
Compute units | 6 | |
Core clock speed | 730 MHz | 300 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 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 | 192 |
Pixel fill rate | 8.192 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 24.58 GTexel/s | 12 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 15 Watt |
Transistor count | 1550 million | 4,940 million |
Floating-point performance | 384.0 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | IGP |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
Width | IGP | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | |
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | |
Shader Model | 6.3 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 14.40 GB/s | |
Memory bus width | 64 bit | |
Memory clock speed | 900 MHz (1800 MHz effective) | |
Memory type | DDR3 | System Shared |