Radeon RX 590 vs GeForce 8200M G

Place in the ranking	1429	238
Place by popularity	not in top-100	100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	24.00
Power efficiency	no data	9.63
Architecture	no data	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	MCP77MV MCP79MVL	Polaris 30
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	3 June 2008 (16 years ago)	15 November 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$279

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	8	2304
Core clock speed	400 MHz	1469 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1545 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	80 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	175 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	222.5
Floating-point processing power	no data	7.119 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	32
TMUs	no data	144

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Interface	no data	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	241 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	no data	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	no data	8 GB
Memory bus width	no data	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	256.0 GB/s
Shared memory	+	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	no data	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	10	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	no data	6.4
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	2.0
Vulkan	-	1.2.131

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

8200M G 0.15

RX 590 23.59
+15627%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

8200M G 58

RX 590 9390
+16090%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	0−1	102
1440p	-0−1	61
4K	-0−1	37

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.74
1440p	no data	4.57
4K	no data	7.54

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −300%	40−45 +300%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −2400%	50−55 +2400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −300%	40−45 +300%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −2400%	50−55 +2400%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −2640%	137 +2640%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −2175%	91 +2175%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −300%	40−45 +300%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −2400%	50−55 +2400%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −971%	75−80 +971%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −2180%	114 +2180%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	5−6 −4680%	239 +4680%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −875%	39 +875%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −1875%	75−80 +1875%
World of Tanks	10−11 −2450%	250−260 +2450%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −300%	40−45 +300%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −2400%	50−55 +2400%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −971%	75−80 +971%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −1900%	100 +1900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	5−6 −1480%	79 +1480%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4 −733%	24−27 +733%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	1−2 −17400%	170−180 +17400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −600%	21−24 +600%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −1675%	70−75 +1675%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −800%	35−40 +800%
Valorant	4−5 −1775%	75 +1775%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 −173%	41 +173%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −173%	41 +173%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	0−1	82
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −173%	41 +173%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	30
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Dota 2	14−16 −180%	40−45 +180%
Valorant	0−1	39