GeForce GT 620 vs Radeon R6 (Carrizo)

Place in the ranking	983	1117
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.02
Power efficiency	2.98	1.39
Architecture	GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	Carrizo	GF108
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	4 June 2015 (9 years ago)	15 May 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$39.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores	384	96
Core clock speed	no data	700 MHz
Boost clock speed	800 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2410 Million	585 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12-35 Watt	49 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	98 °C
Texture fill rate	no data	11.20
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.2688 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	4
TMUs	no data	16

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 size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	no data	PCI Express 2.0
Interface	no data	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	145 mm
Height	no data	2.7" (6.9 cm)
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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	no data	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	no data	1 GB
Memory bus width	64/128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	1.8 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	no data	14.4 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 Connectors	no data	Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI, VGA
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	-	+
HDCP	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	Internal

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (FL 12_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	no data	5.1
OpenGL	no data	4.2
OpenCL	no data	1.1
Vulkan	-	N/A
CUDA	-	+

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

11
+57.1%

7−8

−57.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

5.71

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Dota 2	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Fortnite	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Grand Theft Auto V	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18 +60%	10−11 −60%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
World of Tanks	31 +72.2%	18−20 −72.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Dota 2	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18 +60%	10−11 −60%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
World of Tanks	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Forza Horizon 5	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Valorant	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +60%	10−11 −60%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +66.7%	9−10 −66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +66.7%	9−10 −66.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Dota 2	16−18 +60%	10−11 −60%
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Valorant	1−2	0−1

This is how R6 (Carrizo) and GT 620 compete in popular games:

R6 (Carrizo) is 57% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.46	0.95
Recency	4 June 2015	15 May 2012
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12 Watt	49 Watt

R6 (Carrizo) has a 53.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 308.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R6 (Carrizo) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 620 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R6 (Carrizo) is a notebook card while GeForce GT 620 is a desktop one.

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