Radeon RX 6300M vs UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) and Radeon RX 6300M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.


UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU)
2021
4 Watt
1.26

6300M outperforms Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) by a whopping 1118% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1080381
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency9.7033.77
ArchitectureGen. 11 (2021)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameGen. 11Navi 24
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date11 January 2021 (5 years ago)4 January 2022 (4 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 cores24768
Core clock speed350 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speed800 MHz2400 MHz
Number of transistorsno data5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)4.8 - 10 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rateno data115.2
Floating-point processing powerno data3.686 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data48
Ray Tracing Coresno data12
L0 Cacheno data192 KB
L1 Cacheno data256 KB
L2 Cacheno data1024 KB
L3 Cacheno data8 MB

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x4
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data32 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data72 GB/s
Shared memory+-
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectorsno dataNo outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Sync+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12_112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.2
Vulkan-1.3

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 HD8
−1088%
95−100
+1088%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1000%
30−35
+1000%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 0−1 30−35

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 1−2
−6600%
65−70
+6600%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1000%
30−35
+1000%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−2450%
50−55
+2450%
Fortnite 3−4
−2800%
85−90
+2800%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−713%
65−70
+713%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−4800%
45−50
+4800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−544%
55−60
+544%
Valorant 30−35
−285%
120−130
+285%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 1−2
−6600%
65−70
+6600%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18
−1039%
200−210
+1039%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1000%
30−35
+1000%
Dota 2 12
−708%
95−100
+708%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−2450%
50−55
+2450%
Fortnite 3−4
−2800%
85−90
+2800%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−713%
65−70
+713%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−4800%
45−50
+4800%
Grand Theft Auto V 3
−1867%
55−60
+1867%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−1550%
30−35
+1550%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−544%
55−60
+544%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−500%
40−45
+500%
Valorant 30−35
−285%
120−130
+285%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
−6600%
65−70
+6600%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1000%
30−35
+1000%
Dota 2 11
−782%
95−100
+782%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−2450%
50−55
+2450%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−713%
65−70
+713%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−544%
55−60
+544%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−500%
40−45
+500%
Valorant 30−35
−285%
120−130
+285%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
−2800%
85−90
+2800%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
−650%
30−33
+650%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 8−9
−1338%
110−120
+1338%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−1069%
150−160
+1069%
Valorant 3−4
−5133%
150−160
+5133%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 14−16
Far Cry 5 1−2
−3300%
30−35
+3300%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−1167%
35−40
+1167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−1050%
21−24
+1050%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−107%
27−30
+107%
Valorant 6−7
−1350%
85−90
+1350%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 1−2
−5500%
55−60
+5500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−650%
14−16
+650%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

1440p
High

Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

This is how UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) and RX 6300M compete in popular games:

  • RX 6300M is 1088% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 6300M is 6600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6300M performs better in 44 tests (76%)
  • there's a draw in 14 tests (24%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.26 15.35
Recency 11 January 2021 4 January 2022
Chip lithography 10 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 4 Watt 35 Watt

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) has 775% lower power consumption.

RX 6300M, on the other hand, has a 1118% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 months, and a 67% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6300M is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) in performance tests.

Other comparisons

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.


3.5 133 votes

Rate UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 14 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6300M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) or Radeon RX 6300M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.