Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 2.1 TFLOPS vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking660not rated
Place by popularity39not in top-100
Power efficiency20.71no data
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)no data
GPU code nameVega Raven Ridgeno data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date26 October 2017 (7 years ago)no data (2024 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 cores512768
Core clock speed300 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1200 MHzno data
Number of transistors9,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate57.60no data
Floating-point processing power1.843 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs32no 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).

InterfaceIGPno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 SharedLPDDR5x
Maximum RAM amountSystem Sharedno data
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared8448 MHz
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.

DirectX12 (12_1)12_1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.1no data
Vulkan1.2-

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 14 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 20 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) has 33.3% lower power consumption.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 2.1 TFLOPS, on the other hand, has a 250% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 2.1 TFLOPS. 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 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 2.1 TFLOPS
SD X Adreno X1-45 2.1 TFLOPS

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 1450 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 44 votes

Rate Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 2.1 TFLOPS 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.