GeForce 3 Go vs Radeon HD 7620G

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1114not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.60no data
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)no data
GPU code nameDevastatorno data
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date15 May 2012 (12 years ago)1 February 2002 (22 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 cores384no data
Core clock speed360 MHzno data
Boost clock speed497 MHz250 MHz
Number of transistors1,303 million27 Million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt2 Watt
Texture fill rate11.93no data
Floating-point processing power0.3817 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs24no 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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfaceIGPno data
WidthIGPno 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 typeSystem SharedDDR
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared64 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared32 / 64 / 128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)DDR
Shader Model5.0no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCL1.2no data
VulkanN/A-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 May 2012 1 February 2002
Chip lithography 32 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 2 Watt

HD 7620G has an age advantage of 10 years, and a 368.8% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 3 Go, on the other hand, has 1150% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 7620G and GeForce 3 Go. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 7620G is a desktop card while GeForce 3 Go is a notebook 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 7620G
Radeon HD 7620G
NVIDIA GeForce 3 Go
GeForce 3 Go

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.


2.9 21 vote

Rate Radeon HD 7620G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 5 votes

Rate GeForce 3 Go 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.