Qualcomm Adreno 685 vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

Place in the ranking	488	831
Place by popularity	28	not in top-100
Power efficiency	41.35	24.98
Architecture	Vega (2017−2020)	no data
GPU code name	Vega	no data
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	7 January 2020 (5 years ago)	6 December 2018 (6 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	512	no data
Boost clock speed	2100 MHz	no data
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	7 Watt

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.

Shared memory

API compatibility

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

DirectX

12_1

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 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 9.01
+255%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 2.54

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 Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.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 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 5891
+206%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 1927

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	23 +283%	6−7 −283%
1440p	17 +325%	4−5 −325%
4K	9 +350%	2−3 −350%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	13 +30%	10−11 −30%
Cyberpunk 2077	19 +217%	6−7 −217%
Elden Ring	18 +350%	4−5 −350%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +383%	6−7 −383%
Counter-Strike 2	9 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	15 +150%	6−7 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	32 +146%	12−14 −146%
Metro Exodus	27 +575%	4−5 −575%
Red Dead Redemption 2	33 +230%	10−11 −230%
Valorant	44 +267%	12−14 −267%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +383%	6−7 −383%
Counter-Strike 2	9 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Dota 2	29 +383%	6−7 −383%
Elden Ring	22 +450%	4−5 −450%
Far Cry 5	30 +100%	14−16 −100%
Fortnite	50−55 +279%	14−16 −279%
Forza Horizon 4	27 +108%	12−14 −108%
Grand Theft Auto V	19 +217%	6−7 −217%
Metro Exodus	19 +375%	4−5 −375%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	57 +138%	24−27 −138%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12 +20%	10−11 −20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +170%	10−11 −170%
Valorant	14 +367%	3−4 −367%
World of Tanks	48 +2.1%	45−50 −2.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +383%	6−7 −383%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +70%	10−11 −70%
Cyberpunk 2077	9 +50%	6−7 −50%
Dota 2	48 +700%	6−7 −700%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +153%	14−16 −153%
Forza Horizon 4	23 +76.9%	12−14 −76.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 +196%	24−27 −196%
Valorant	37 +270%	10−11 −270%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	9 +350%	2−3 −350%
Elden Ring	12 +500%	2−3 −500%
Grand Theft Auto V	9	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	22 +22.2%	18−20 −22.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
World of Tanks	21 +23.5%	16−18 −23.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +750%	2−3 −750%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	2 −50%	3−4 +50%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +171%	7−8 −171%
Forza Horizon 4	16 +300%	4−5 −300%
Metro Exodus	17 +325%	4−5 −325%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Valorant	39 +333%	9−10 −333%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4	0−1
Dota 2	10 −60%	16−18 +60%
Elden Ring	6 +500%	1−2 −500%
Grand Theft Auto V	10 −50%	14−16 +50%
Metro Exodus	6 +500%	1−2 −500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	13 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10 −50%	14−16 +50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Counter-Strike 2	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Dota 2	18 +12.5%	16−18 −12.5%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
Fortnite	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Forza Horizon 4	9 +350%	2−3 −350%
Valorant	9−10 +350%	2−3 −350%

This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and Qualcomm Adreno 685 compete in popular games:

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 283% faster in 1080p
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 325% faster in 1440p
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 350% faster in 4K

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

in Fortnite, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 800% faster.
in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 685 is 60% faster.

All in all, in popular games: