GeForce GTX 275 vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

Radeon RX Vega 2 Radeon RX Vega 3 Radeon RX Vega 5 Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 9
VS
GTX 260 GTX 260 Core 216 GTX 260 OEM GTX 275 GTX 275 PhysX Edition GTX 280 GTX 285 GTX 295 GTX 660 GTX 750 Ti GTX 960 GTX 970

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) with GeForce GTX 275, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
2020
15 Watt
9.04
+152%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) outperforms GTX 275 by a whopping 152% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
GTX 275 GTX 275

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking480716
Place by popularity29not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.37
Power efficiency42.031.14
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameVegaGT200B
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date7 January 2020 (4 years ago)15 January 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores512240
Core clock speedno data633 MHz
Boost clock speed2100 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt219 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rateno data50.64
Floating-point processing powerno data0.6739 TFLOPS
ROPsno data28
TMUsno data80

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).

Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Heightno data4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 6-pin
SLI options-+

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 typeno dataGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data896 MB
Memory bus widthno data448 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1134 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data127.0 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 dataTwo Dual Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_111.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data3.0
OpenCLno data1.1
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 HD22
+175%
8−9
−175%
1440p16
+167%
6−7
−167%
4K10
+233%
3−4
−233%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data31.13
1440pno data41.50
4Kno data83.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 19
+171%
7−8
−171%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20
+186%
7−8
−186%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+180%
10−11
−180%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+180%
5−6
−180%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+160%
10−11
−160%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+154%
24−27
−154%
Hitman 3 15
+200%
5−6
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+183%
18−20
−183%
Metro Exodus 35
+192%
12−14
−192%
Red Dead Redemption 2 33
+175%
12−14
−175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 36
+157%
14−16
−157%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+186%
21−24
−186%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16
+167%
6−7
−167%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+180%
10−11
−180%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+233%
3−4
−233%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+160%
10−11
−160%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+154%
24−27
−154%
Hitman 3 15
+200%
5−6
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+183%
18−20
−183%
Metro Exodus 25
+178%
9−10
−178%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+178%
9−10
−178%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27
+170%
10−11
−170%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+178%
9−10
−178%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+186%
21−24
−186%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14
+180%
5−6
−180%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+154%
24−27
−154%
Hitman 3 14
+180%
5−6
−180%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24
+167%
9−10
−167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 23
+156%
9−10
−156%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+180%
5−6
−180%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12
+200%
4−5
−200%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21
+163%
8−9
−163%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 11
+175%
4−5
−175%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+179%
14−16
−179%
Hitman 3 10
+233%
3−4
−233%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20
+186%
7−8
−186%
Metro Exodus 17
+183%
6−7
−183%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16
+167%
6−7
−167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 59
+181%
21−24
−181%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 13
+160%
5−6
−160%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Hitman 3 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+164%
14−16
−164%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%

This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and GTX 275 compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 175% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 167% faster in 1440p
  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 233% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 9.04 3.59
Recency 7 January 2020 15 January 2009
Chip lithography 7 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 219 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has a 151.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 685.7% more advanced lithography process, and 1360% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 275 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 275 is a desktop one.

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 4000/5000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275
GeForce GTX 275
Like
Like

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
HD 6970M Crossfire Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire
GTX 275 GeForce GTX 275
vs
Radeon 540 Radeon 540
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
GTX 870M GeForce GTX 870M
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
ATI 9200 LE Radeon 9200 LE
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
ATI DDR VIVO SE Radeon DDR VIVO SE
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
210 PCI GeForce 210 PCI
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
GT 230 GeForce GT 230
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
9600 GTX GeForce 9600 GTX
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
GTX 285 GeForce GTX 285
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
9800 GT Rebrand GeForce 9800 GT Rebrand
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
9600 GSO GeForce 9600 GSO
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
9800 GX2 GeForce 9800 GX2
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
GeForce 8400 GeForce 8400

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.8 1123 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 137 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 275 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.