NVIDIA GeForce 820M vs AMD Radeon HD 6570

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 820M and AMD Radeon HD 6570 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 NVIDIA GeForce 820M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 1 month(s) later
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 2x more memory clock speed: 1802 MHz vs 900 MHz
• Around 79% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 2789 vs 1561
• Around 82% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 7.765 vs 4.278
• Around 48% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.686 vs 0.464
• Around 5% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 14.257 vs 13.633
• Around 39% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1447 vs 1044
• Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3349 vs 2716
• Around 39% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1447 vs 1044
• Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3349 vs 2716

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 6570

• Around 56% higher texture fill rate: 15.6 GTexel / s vs 10 GTexel / s
• 5x more pipelines: 480 vs 96
• 2.6x better floating-point performance: 624.0 gflops vs 240.0 gflops
• Around 13% lower typical power consumption: 40 Watt vs 45 Watt
• Around 14% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 559 vs 490
• Around 91% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 218 vs 114
• Around 58% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 255.525 vs 161.305
• 2.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 59.183 vs 22.768
• Around 8% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1296 vs 1195
• Around 8% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1296 vs 1195

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 820M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6570

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	490 559
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	114 218
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	2789 1561
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7.765 4.278
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	161.305 255.525
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.686 0.464
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	14.257 13.633
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	22.768 59.183
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1195 1296
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1447 1044
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3349 2716
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1195 1296
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1447 1044
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3349 2716
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	847 846

Compare specifications (specs)