GMA 950 vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 656 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | 41 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | Vega (2017−2020) | Generation 3.5 (2005) |
| GPU code name | Vega Raven Ridge | Lakeport |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 26 October 2017 (6 years ago) | 1 May 2005 (19 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 512 | no data |
| Core clock speed | no data | 166 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1200 MHz | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 7 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 0.66 |
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 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | IGP |
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 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | no data | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | no data | System Shared |
| 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 | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 9.0c |
| Shader Model | no data | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | no data | 2.0 |
| OpenCL | no data | N/A |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 26 October 2017 | 1 May 2005 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 7 Watt |
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) has an age advantage of 12 years, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.
GMA 950, on the other hand, has 114.3% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and GMA 950. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a notebook card while GMA 950 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
