AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL vs AMD Radeon Pro 460
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL and AMD Radeon Pro 460 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: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D 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), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- Around 10% higher core clock speed: 931 MHz vs 850 MHz
- Around 11% higher boost clock speed: 1011 MHz vs 907 MHz
- Around 39% higher texture fill rate: 80.88 GTexel / s vs 58.05 GTexel / s
- Around 25% higher pipelines: 1280 vs 1024
- Around 39% better floating-point performance: 2,588 gflops vs 1,858 gflops
- Around 10% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3809 vs 3453
- Around 26% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 19300 vs 15309
- Around 34% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 58.971 vs 44.089
- 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1235.247 vs 594.914
- Around 50% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.195 vs 3.46
- Around 35% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 75.289 vs 55.755
- Around 11% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 252.311 vs 226.93
- Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6318 vs 4664
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2070 vs 1842
- Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6318 vs 4664
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2070 vs 1842
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 1 February 2018 vs 30 October 2016 |
Core clock speed | 931 MHz vs 850 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1011 MHz vs 907 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 80.88 GTexel / s vs 58.05 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1280 vs 1024 |
Floating-point performance | 2,588 gflops vs 1,858 gflops |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3809 vs 3453 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 19300 vs 15309 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 58.971 vs 44.089 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1235.247 vs 594.914 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.195 vs 3.46 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 75.289 vs 55.755 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 252.311 vs 226.93 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6318 vs 4664 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2070 vs 1842 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6318 vs 4664 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2070 vs 1842 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro 460
- Around 86% lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 65 Watt
- 3.6x more memory clock speed: 5080 MHz vs 1400 MHz
- Around 41% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 679 vs 482
- 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3346 vs 1514
- 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3346 vs 1514
Specifications (specs) | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt vs 65 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 5080 MHz vs 1400 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 679 vs 482 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 vs 1514 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 vs 1514 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro 460
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D 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) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL | AMD Radeon Pro 460 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3809 | 3453 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 482 | 679 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 19300 | 15309 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 58.971 | 44.089 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1235.247 | 594.914 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.195 | 3.46 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 75.289 | 55.755 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 252.311 | 226.93 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6318 | 4664 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2070 | 1842 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1514 | 3346 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6318 | 4664 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2070 | 1842 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1514 | 3346 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2091 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL | AMD Radeon Pro 460 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 4.0 | GCN 4.0 |
Code name | Polaris 22 | Baffin |
Launch date | 1 February 2018 | 30 October 2016 |
Place in performance rating | 634 | 635 |
Type | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1011 MHz | 907 MHz |
Core clock speed | 931 MHz | 850 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 2,588 gflops | 1,858 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 14 nm |
Pipelines | 1280 | 1024 |
Texture fill rate | 80.88 GTexel / s | 58.05 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 35 Watt |
Transistor count | 3,000 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Laptop size | large | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12.0 (12_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 204.8 GB / s | 81.28 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 1024 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1400 MHz | 5080 MHz |
Memory type | HBM2 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
DisplayPort 1.3 HBR / 1.4 HDR Ready | ||
FreeSync | ||
HDMI 2.0 |