AMD Radeon RX 640 vs AMD Radeon 520
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon RX 640 and AMD Radeon 520 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), Geekbench - OpenCL, PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX 640
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 0 month(s) later
- Around 5% higher core clock speed: 1082 MHz vs 1030 MHz
- Around 18% higher boost clock speed: 1218 MHz vs 1030 MHz
- Around 89% higher texture fill rate: 38.98 GTexel/s vs 20.60 GTexel/s
- Around 60% higher pipelines: 512 vs 320
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 42% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1769 vs 1242
- Around 42% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1769 vs 1242
- 2.8x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3278 vs 1182
- 2.8x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3278 vs 1182
- Around 73% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 352 vs 203
- 2.5x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2142 vs 865
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 13 May 2019 vs 18 April 2017 |
| Core clock speed | 1082 MHz vs 1030 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1218 MHz vs 1030 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 38.98 GTexel/s vs 20.60 GTexel/s |
| Pipelines | 512 vs 320 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1769 vs 1242 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1769 vs 1242 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3278 vs 1182 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3278 vs 1182 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 352 vs 203 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2142 vs 865 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon 520
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- 2.6x more memory clock speed: 4500 MHz vs 1750 MHz (7000 MHz effective)
- Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3351 vs 2775
- Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3351 vs 2775
- 2.3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 26304 vs 11683
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 4500 MHz vs 1750 MHz (7000 MHz effective) |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 vs 2775 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 vs 2775 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 26304 vs 11683 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 640
GPU 2: AMD Radeon 520
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon RX 640 | AMD Radeon 520 |
|---|---|---|
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1769 | 1242 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1769 | 1242 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2775 | 3351 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2775 | 3351 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3278 | 1182 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3278 | 1182 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11683 | 26304 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 352 | 203 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2142 | 865 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon RX 640 | AMD Radeon 520 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | Arctic Islands | Oland |
| Launch date | 13 May 2019 | 18 April 2017 |
| Place in performance rating | 794 | 1109 |
| Design | Radeon 500 Series | |
| GCN generation | 1st Gen | |
| Type | Desktop, Laptop | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1218 MHz | 1030 MHz |
| Compute units | 8 | 5 |
| Core clock speed | 1082 MHz | 1030 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 77.95 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 1247 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 1247 GFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 512 | 320 |
| Pixel fill rate | 19.49 GPixel/s | 4.10 GP/s |
| Texture fill rate | 38.98 GTexel/s | 20.60 GTexel/s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Transistor count | 2200 million | 1,040 million |
| Floating-point performance | 660 GFLOPs | |
| Render output units | 4 | |
| Stream Processors | 320 | |
| Texture Units | 20 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Dual-link DVI support | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Length | 5.7 inches (145 mm) | |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
| Width | Dual-slot | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 48 GB/s |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 64 bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz (7000 MHz effective) | 4500 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
| 4K H264 Decode | ||
| 4K H264 Encode | ||
| AMD Graphics Core Next (GCN) Architecture | ||
| AMD Radeon™ ReLive | ||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| DualGraphics | ||
| Enduro | ||
| H265/HEVC Decode | ||
| H265/HEVC Encode | ||
| HDMI 4K Support | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| TressFX | ||

