AMD Radeon Vega 8 Embedded vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Vega 8 Embedded and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 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 Vega 8 Embedded
- Videocard is newer: launch date 9 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 55 nm
- 19.3x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 289 Watt
- Around 32% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1580 vs 1201
- 4.3x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 409 vs 96
- 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 6729 vs 3107
- 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 6729 vs 3107
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 13 February 2018 vs 8 January 2009 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 55 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 289 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1580 vs 1201 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 409 vs 96 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 6729 vs 3107 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 6729 vs 3107 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
- 4.1x more core clock speed: 1242 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 2.4x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 21048 vs 8803
- Around 42% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3443 vs 2433
- Around 42% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3443 vs 2433
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1242 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 21048 vs 8803 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3443 vs 2433 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3443 vs 2433 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Vega 8 Embedded
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon Vega 8 Embedded | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1580 | 1201 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 409 | 96 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 8803 | 21048 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.891 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 365.4 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.104 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 37.17 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 132.07 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1514 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2433 | 3443 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 6729 | 3107 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1514 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2433 | 3443 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 6729 | 3107 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 705 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon Vega 8 Embedded | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | Owl | GT200B |
| Launch date | 13 February 2018 | 8 January 2009 |
| Place in performance rating | 948 | 945 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $500 | |
| Price now | $159.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 8.53 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1300 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 1242 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 55 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 289 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4,940 million | 1,400 million |
| CUDA cores | 480 | |
| CUDA cores per GPU | 240 | |
| Floating-point performance | 2x 596.2 gflops | |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | |
| Pipelines | 2x 240 | |
| Texture fill rate | 92.2 billion / sec | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, Two Dual Link DVIHDMI |
| Audio input for HDMI | S / PDIF | |
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 6-pin & 8-pin |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
| Length | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) | |
| SLI options | Quad | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 1792 MB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 223.8 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 896 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 999 MHz | |
| Memory interface width per GPU | 448 Bit | |
| Memory type | GDDR3 | |
| Standard memory config per GPU | 896 MB | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR) | 128bit | |
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon Vega 8 Embedded with others
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Embedded vs
NVIDIAGeForce4 Ti 4800 SE
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Embedded vs
NVIDIAGeForce FX Go5600
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Embedded vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 295
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Embedded vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 675M
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Embedded vs
AMDFirePro M4000
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Embedded vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 720A
