Quadro T600 Mobile vs Radeon RX Vega M GL
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX Vega M GL with Quadro T600 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
T600 Mobile outperforms RX Vega M GL by an impressive 81% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 450 | 311 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 10.73 | 31.56 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Turing (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 22 | TU117 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 1 February 2018 (7 years ago) | 12 April 2021 (3 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 | 1280 | 896 |
| Core clock speed | 931 MHz | 780 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1011 MHz | 1410 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,000 million | 4,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 40 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 80.88 | 78.96 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.588 TFLOPS | 2.527 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 56 |
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).
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
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 | HBM2 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 1024 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 179.2 GB/s | 192.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.3 |
| CUDA | - | 7.5 |
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.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
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 | 27−30
−88.9%
| 51
+88.9%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Fortnite | 55−60
−63.2%
|
90−95
+63.2%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−88.2%
|
60−65
+88.2%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 140−150
−50.7%
|
210−220
+50.7%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
−68.1%
|
116
+68.1%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
−63.2%
|
90−95
+63.2%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35−40
−75%
|
63
+75%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−88.2%
|
60−65
+88.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
−108%
|
52
+108%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 65−70
−55.1%
|
107
+55.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−88.2%
|
60−65
+88.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
−12%
|
28
+12%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 55−60
−63.2%
|
90−95
+63.2%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
−55%
|
30−35
+55%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 35−40
−71.4%
|
60−65
+71.4%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−88.9%
|
16−18
+88.9%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 9−10
−88.9%
|
16−18
+88.9%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 53
+0%
|
53
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 49
+0%
|
49
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45
+0%
|
45
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
This is how RX Vega M GL and T600 Mobile compete in popular games:
- T600 Mobile is 89% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the T600 Mobile is 140% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- T600 Mobile is ahead in 17 tests (38%)
- there's a draw in 28 tests (62%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.01 | 18.11 |
| Recency | 1 February 2018 | 12 April 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 40 Watt |
T600 Mobile has a 80.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 62.5% lower power consumption.
The Quadro T600 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega M GL in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon RX Vega M GL is a notebook graphics card while Quadro T600 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
