Quadro K620M vs Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

Place in the ranking	579	764
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	29.18	7.27
Architecture	Vega (2017−2020)	Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code name	Vega Renoir	GM108
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	7 January 2020 (4 years ago)	1 March 2015 (9 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 cores	384	384
Core clock speed	400 MHz	1029 MHz
Boost clock speed	1500 MHz	1124 MHz
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	30 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	17.98
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.8632 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	8
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).

Interface	no data	MXM-A (3.0)
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	2 GB
Memory bus width	no data	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	14.4 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 Connectors	no data	No outputs
Display Port	no data	1.2

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	-	+
nView Display Management	no data	+
Optimus	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12_1	12
Shader Model	no data	5.1
OpenGL	no data	4.5
OpenCL	no data	1.2
Vulkan	-	1.1.126
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.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 6.06
+101%

Quadro K620M 3.02

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 4210
+73%

Quadro K620M 2434

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.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 2793
+72.3%

Quadro K620M 1621

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 21857
+140%

Quadro K620M 9092

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 25
+16%

Quadro K620M 22

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	20 −5%	21 +5%
1440p	28 +133%	12−14 −133%
4K	18 +125%	8−9 −125%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

11
+83.3%

6−7

−83.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Battlefield 5	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14 +100%	7−8 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	9 +50%	6−7 −50%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +125%	8−9 −125%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +156%	16−18 −156%
Hitman 3	11 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	97 +322%	21−24 −322%
Metro Exodus	23 +475%	4−5 −475%
Red Dead Redemption 2	22 +214%	7−8 −214%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +83.3%	12−14 −83.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	62 +59%	35−40 −59%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Battlefield 5	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	6 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +125%	8−9 −125%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +156%	16−18 −156%
Hitman 3	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	73 +217%	21−24 −217%
Metro Exodus	17 +325%	4−5 −325%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14 +100%	7−8 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21 +75%	12−14 −75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 +42.9%	14−16 −42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50 +28.2%	35−40 −28.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +156%	16−18 −156%
Hitman 3	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	17 −35.3%	21−24 +35.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18 +50%	12−14 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	11 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +30.8%	35−40 −30.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14
+100%

7−8

−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +111%	9−10 −111%
Hitman 3	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +122%	18−20 −122%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12
+83.3%

6−7

−83.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Hitman 3	2−3	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	11 +120%	5−6 −120%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+75%

4−5

−75%

This is how RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and Quadro K620M compete in popular games:

Quadro K620M is 5% faster in 1080p
RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 133% faster in 1440p
RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 125% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 700% faster.
in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro K620M is 35% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is ahead in 59 tests (95%)
Quadro K620M is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.06	3.02
Recency	7 January 2020	1 March 2015
Chip lithography	7 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	30 Watt

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has a 100.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K620M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K620M is a mobile workstation one.

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