GeForce MX450 25W vs Radeon RX Vega 3

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking776not rated
Place by popularity80not in top-100
Power efficiency13.85no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code namePicassoTU117
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date6 January 2019 (5 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 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 cores192896
Core clock speed300 MHz720 MHz
Boost clock speed1001 MHz930 MHz
Number of transistors4,940 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate12.0152.08
Floating-point processing power0.3844 TFLOPS1.667 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs1256

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x4
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared2 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data80 GB/s
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 outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2
CUDA-7.5

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 January 2019 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 25 Watt

RX Vega 3 has 66.7% lower power consumption.

MX450 25W, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 3 and GeForce MX450 25W. 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 RX Vega 3
Radeon RX Vega 3
NVIDIA GeForce MX450 25W
GeForce MX450 25W

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 1961 vote

Rate Radeon RX Vega 3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 26 votes

Rate GeForce MX450 25W 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.