ATI Radeon 9600 PRO vs HD 6520G

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1143not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.53no data
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Rage 8 (2002−2007)
GPU code nameSumoRV350
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date7 December 2011 (12 years ago)1 October 2003 (21 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 cores320no data
Core clock speed400 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million60 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate6.4001.600
Floating-point processing power0.256 TFLOPSno data
ROPs84
TMUs164

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).

InterfaceIGPAGP 8x
WidthIGP1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedDDR
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared128 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared300 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data9.6 GB/s
Shared memory+no data

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 outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)9.0 (9_0)
Shader Model5.0no data
OpenGL4.42.0
OpenCL1.2N/A
VulkanN/AN/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

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



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.

HD 6520G 299
+612%
ATI 9600 PRO 42

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 December 2011 1 October 2003
Chip lithography 32 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 18 Watt

HD 6520G has an age advantage of 8 years, and a 306.3% more advanced lithography process.

ATI 9600 PRO, on the other hand, has 94.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 6520G and Radeon 9600 PRO. We've got no test results to judge.


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.


AMD Radeon HD 6520G
Radeon HD 6520G
ATI Radeon 9600 PRO
Radeon 9600 PRO

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.


3.4 135 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6520G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 70 votes

Rate Radeon 9600 PRO 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.