Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) vs Quadro M620

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M620 with Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000), including specs and performance data.

Quadro M620
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
7.24
+60.9%

M620 outperforms RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) by an impressive 61% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking538656
Place by popularitynot in top-10030
Power efficiency16.6820.74
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGM107Vega Raven Ridge
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date11 January 2017 (7 years ago)26 October 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 cores512512
Core clock speed756 MHzno data
Boost clock speed977 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate31.26no data
Floating-point processing power1 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no data

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1253 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth80 GB/sno data
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 data
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.126-
CUDA5.0-

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.

Quadro M620 7.24
+60.9%
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 4.50

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.

Quadro M620 2794
+60.9%
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 1737

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.

Quadro M620 3801
+6.9%
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 3557

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.

Quadro M620 17237
+67.4%
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 10294

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.

Quadro M620 3130
+31.5%
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 2381

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.

Quadro M620 22120
+40.3%
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 15770

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Quadro M620 862
+24.4%
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 693

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 HD24
+41.2%
17
−41.2%
4K10
+0%
10
+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+33.3%
9
−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+20%
15
−20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+0%
10
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+16.7%
18
−16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+50%
10
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+33.3%
9
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−12.5%
18
+12.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+11.1%
18
−11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−20.8%
58
+20.8%
Hitman 3 14−16
+55.6%
9
−55.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+43.3%
30−33
−43.3%
Metro Exodus 21−24
−4.8%
22
+4.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+25%
16
−25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+26.3%
19
−26.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
−20.4%
65
+20.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−66.7%
30
+66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+90.9%
10−12
−90.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+50%
10
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+100%
6
−100%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+60%
10
−60%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+53.8%
13
−53.8%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−8.3%
52
+8.3%
Hitman 3 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+43.3%
30−33
−43.3%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+23.5%
17
−23.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+100%
10
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+50%
16
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 62
+100%
31
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
−1.9%
55
+1.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+125%
8
−125%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+114%
7
−114%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+140%
5
−140%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+129%
7
−129%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+109%
23
−109%
Hitman 3 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+187%
15
−187%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+71.4%
14
−71.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+25%
8
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+20%
45−50
−20%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+100%
10
−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+225%
8−9
−225%
Hitman 3 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+64.3%
27−30
−64.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Hitman 3 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+700%
3−4
−700%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−12.5%
9
+12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%

This is how Quadro M620 and RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M620 is 41% faster in 1080p
  • A tie in 4K

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro M620 is 700% faster.
  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 67% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro M620 is ahead in 57 tests (85%)
  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is ahead in 8 tests (12%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.24 4.50
Recency 11 January 2017 26 October 2017
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 15 Watt

Quadro M620 has a 60.9% higher aggregate performance score.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 months, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M620 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M620 is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a mobile workstation one.


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 Quadro M620
Quadro M620
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

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.


3.3 193 votes

Rate Quadro M620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1377 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 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.