AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient vs NVIDIA Quadro M520 Mobile
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient and NVIDIA Quadro M520 Mobile 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: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, 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, Geekbench - OpenCL.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 1% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1894 vs 1884
- Around 58% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 355 vs 225
- Around 87% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3170 vs 1692
- Around 11% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3352 vs 3011
- Around 87% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3170 vs 1692
- Around 11% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3352 vs 3011
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 23 April 2018 vs 11 January 2017 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1894 vs 1884 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 355 vs 225 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3170 vs 1692 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 vs 3011 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3170 vs 1692 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 vs 3011 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M520 Mobile
- 3.5x more core clock speed: 1041 MHz vs 300 MHz
- Around 40% lower typical power consumption: 25 Watt vs 35 Watt
- Around 28% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3079 vs 2408
- Around 28% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3079 vs 2408
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1041 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 25 Watt vs 35 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3079 vs 2408 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3079 vs 2408 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M520 Mobile
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| 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 Vega 8 Efficient | NVIDIA Quadro M520 Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1894 | 1884 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 355 | 225 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 26.039 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 176.928 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.666 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.603 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 135.437 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2408 | 3079 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3170 | 1692 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | 3011 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2408 | 3079 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3170 | 1692 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 | 3011 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 862 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6206 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient | NVIDIA Quadro M520 Mobile | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Maxwell |
| Code name | Raven | GM108 |
| Launch date | 23 April 2018 | 11 January 2017 |
| Place in performance rating | 958 | 959 |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 1041 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt | 25 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4,940 million | |
| Floating-point performance | 799.5 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 384 | |
| Texture fill rate | 16.66 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | IGP | MXM-A (3.0) |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 40.1 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient with others
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
ATIRadeon HD 2400 PRO
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
NVIDIAQuadro K620
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
IntelIris Graphics 550
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
NVIDIAQuadro M520 Mobile
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
AMDRadeon RX Vega 2
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
IntelArc A350M
