GeForce GT 520 vs Radeon HD 7610M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 7610M with GeForce GT 520, including specs and performance data.

HD 7610M
2012
1 GB GDDR3, 20 Watt
1.64
+102%

HD 7610M outperforms GT 520 by a whopping 102% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9451137
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiency5.681.93
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameWhistlerGF119
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date7 January 2012 (12 years ago)13 April 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$59

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores40048
Core clock speed450 MHz810 MHz
Number of transistors716 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt29 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data102 °C
Texture fill rate9.0006.480
Floating-point processing power0.36 TFLOPS0.1555 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs208

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 supportno data16x PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Heightno data2.7" (6.9 cm)
Widthno data1-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 typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB (DDR3)
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz900 MHz (DDR3)
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s14.4 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 outputsDual Link DVI-IHDMIVGA (optional)
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.05.1
OpenGL4.44.2
OpenCL1.21.1
VulkanN/AN/A
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.

HD 7610M 1.64
+102%
GT 520 0.81

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 7610M 632
+103%
GT 520 311

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.

HD 7610M 605
+59.2%
GT 520 380

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 HD13
+117%
6−7
−117%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data9.83

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Hitman 3 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+113%
16−18
−113%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Hitman 3 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+113%
16−18
−113%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Hitman 3 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+113%
16−18
−113%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

This is how HD 7610M and GT 520 compete in popular games:

  • HD 7610M is 117% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.64 0.81
Recency 7 January 2012 13 April 2011
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 29 Watt

HD 7610M has a 102.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 months, and 45% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 7610M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 520 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 7610M is a notebook card while GeForce GT 520 is a desktop 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.


AMD Radeon HD 7610M
Radeon HD 7610M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 520
GeForce GT 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.


3.5 36 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7610M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 754 votes

Rate GeForce GT 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.