Radeon 520 vs GeForce GTX 850M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 850M and Radeon 520, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 850M
2014
2 GB DDR3, 45 Watt
6.51
+219%

GTX 850M outperforms 520 by a whopping 219% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking569876
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.082.84
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGM107Banks
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date12 March 2014 (10 years ago)18 April 2017 (7 years ago)

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 cores640320
Core clock speedUp to 936 MHz1030 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million690 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate36.0820.60
Floating-point processing power1.155 TFLOPS0.6592 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs4020

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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options+-

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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Standard memory configurationDDR3 or GDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 2500 MHz1125 MHz
Memory bandwidth80.0 GB/s36 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI+-
HDCP content protection+-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+-

Supported technologies

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

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
Ansel+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA+-

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.

GTX 850M 6.51
+219%
Radeon 520 2.04

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.

GTX 850M 2511
+219%
Radeon 520 787

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 850M 4386
+117%
Radeon 520 2017

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 850M 15863
+201%
Radeon 520 5266

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 850M 3086
+134%
Radeon 520 1319

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 850M 21873
+160%
Radeon 520 8413

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 850M 9660
+80.5%
Radeon 520 5352

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

GTX 850M 8686
+95.9%
Radeon 520 4434

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

GTX 850M 42
+248%
Radeon 520 12

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:

900p84
+250%
24−27
−250%
Full HD32
+146%
13
−146%
4K10
+233%
3−4
−233%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+143%
7−8
−143%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+260%
5−6
−260%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+438%
8−9
−438%
Hitman 3 12−14
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+117%
18−20
−117%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+260%
5−6
−260%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+120%
10−11
−120%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+44.4%
35−40
−44.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+143%
7−8
−143%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+260%
5−6
−260%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+438%
8−9
−438%
Hitman 3 12−14
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+117%
18−20
−117%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+260%
5−6
−260%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+120%
10−11
−120%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 58
+222%
18
−222%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+44.4%
35−40
−44.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+143%
7−8
−143%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+438%
8−9
−438%
Hitman 3 12−14
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+117%
18−20
−117%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+120%
10−11
−120%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+83.3%
6
−83.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+44.4%
35−40
−44.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+250%
6−7
−250%
Hitman 3 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+273%
10−12
−273%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Hitman 3 3−4 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+260%
5−6
−260%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%

This is how GTX 850M and Radeon 520 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 850M is 250% faster in 900p
  • GTX 850M is 146% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 850M is 233% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 850M is 1700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 850M surpassed Radeon 520 in all 54 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.51 2.04
Recency 12 March 2014 18 April 2017
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 50 Watt

GTX 850M has a 219.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 11.1% lower power consumption.

Radeon 520, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years.

The GeForce GTX 850M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 520 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
GeForce GTX 850M
AMD Radeon 520
Radeon 520

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 532 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 850M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 334 votes

Rate Radeon 520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.