Radeon 760M vs 620

Place in the ranking	848	352
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	3.23	69.33
Architecture	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Polaris 24	Hawx Point
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	13 May 2019 (5 years ago)	6 December 2023 (less than a year 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 cores	384	512
Core clock speed	730 MHz	800 MHz
Boost clock speed	1024 MHz	2599 MHz
Number of transistors	1,550 million	25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	24.58	83.17
Floating-point processing power	0.7864 TFLOPS	5.323 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	16
TMUs	24	32
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	8

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	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	DDR3	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	64 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	14.4 GB/s	no 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 Connectors

No outputs

Portable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.3	6.8
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

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.

Radeon 620 2.32

Radeon 760M 14.92
+543%

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.

Radeon 620 894

Radeon 760M 5754
+544%

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.

Radeon 620 1730

Radeon 760M 6142
+255%

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	4−5 −675%	31 +675%
1440p	2−3 −850%	19 +850%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6

−500%

30
+500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −338%	35−40 +338%
Battlefield 5	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −417%	30−35 +417%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −380%	24 +380%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −800%	35−40 +800%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −600%	40−45 +600%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 −800%	95−100 +800%
Hitman 3	7−8 −314%	27−30 +314%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −305%	75−80 +305%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −5100%	50−55 +5100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −740%	40−45 +740%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −355%	50−55 +355%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −114%	75−80 +114%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −338%	35−40 +338%
Battlefield 5	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −417%	30−35 +417%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −260%	18 +260%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −800%	35−40 +800%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −600%	40−45 +600%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 −800%	95−100 +800%
Hitman 3	7−8 −314%	27−30 +314%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −305%	75−80 +305%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −5100%	50−55 +5100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −740%	40−45 +740%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −300%	44 +300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −177%	35−40 +177%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −114%	75−80 +114%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −338%	35−40 +338%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −417%	30−35 +417%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −380%	24−27 +380%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −800%	35−40 +800%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 −800%	95−100 +800%
Hitman 3	7−8 −314%	27−30 +314%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −305%	75−80 +305%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −236%	37 +236%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −76.9%	23 +76.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −114%	75−80 +114%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

−740%

40−45
+740%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −625%	27−30 +625%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −667%	21−24 +667%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −650%	14−16 +650%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −700%	8−9 +700%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Hitman 3	7−8 −157%	18−20 +157%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6−7 −417%	30−35 +417%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	12−14 −615%	90−95 +615%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

−400%

24−27
+400%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	14−16
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −1000%	10−12 +1000%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −350%	9−10 +350%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −700%	8−9 +700%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −700%	8−9 +700%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	6−7

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−367%

14−16
+367%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

24−27

+0%

24−27

+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

24−27

+0%

24−27

+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

24−27

+0%

24−27

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

This is how Radeon 620 and Radeon 760M compete in popular games:

Radeon 760M is 675% faster in 1080p
Radeon 760M is 850% faster in 1440p

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 760M is 5100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Radeon 760M is ahead in 56 tests (80%)
there's a draw in 14 tests (20%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.32	14.92
Recency	13 May 2019	6 December 2023
Chip lithography	28 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	15 Watt

Radeon 760M has a 543.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 600% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 760M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 620 in performance tests.

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