Radeon Vega 7 vs GMA 3150

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1628620
Place by popularitynot in top-10023
Power efficiencyno data11.58
ArchitectureGeneration 4.0 (2006−2007)GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code namePineviewCezanne
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date9 May 2007 (19 years ago)13 April 2021 (5 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores16448
Core clock speed400 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1900 MHz
Number of transistors123 million9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology45 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)13 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate0.853.20
Floating-point processing power0.0128 TFLOPS1.702 TFLOPS
ROPs18
TMUs228

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).

InterfacePCIIGP
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 typeSystem SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
Shared memory++

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 outputsNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX9.0c12 (12_1)
Shader Model3.06.4
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A2.1
VulkanN/A1.2

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 HDno data22
1440pno data28
4Kno data18

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 16−18 16−18
Counter-Strike 2 30−35 30−35
Cyberpunk 2077 18 18

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 16−18 16−18
Battlefield 5 28 28
Counter-Strike 2 30−35 30−35
Cyberpunk 2077 14 14
Far Cry 5 20 20
Fortnite 63 63
Forza Horizon 4 37 37
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27 24−27
Valorant 70−75 70−75

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 16−18 16−18
Battlefield 5 23 23
Counter-Strike 2 30−35 30−35
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 58 58
Cyberpunk 2077 10 10
Far Cry 5 18 18
Far Cry 6 17 17
Fortnite 27 27
Forza Horizon 4 35 35
Grand Theft Auto V 17 17
Metro Exodus 13 13
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 23 23
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18 18
Valorant 73 73

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21 21
Cyberpunk 2077 9 9
Far Cry 5 18 18
Forza Horizon 4 27 27
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27 24−27
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13 13
Valorant 25 25

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 14 14

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 12−14 12−14
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55 50−55
Far Cry 6 9−10 9−10
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8 7−8
Metro Exodus 6−7 6−7
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45 40−45
Valorant 48 48

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12−14 12−14
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 5−6
Far Cry 5 12−14 12−14
Forza Horizon 4 16−18 16−18
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10 9−10

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 14−16 14−16

4K
High

Atomic Heart 5−6 5−6
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 6 5−6 5−6
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18 16−18
Metro Exodus 2−3 2−3
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 5−6
Valorant 25 25

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 6−7 6−7
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 2−3
Far Cry 5 6−7 6−7
Forza Horizon 4 10−11 10−11
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8 7−8

4K
Epic

Fortnite 6−7 6−7

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Recency 9 May 2007 13 April 2021
Chip lithography 45 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 13 Watt 45 Watt

GMA 3150 has 71% lower power consumption.

Vega 7, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 13 years, and a 84% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GMA 3150 and Radeon Vega 7. We've got no test results to judge.

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.


2.7 181 votes

Rate GMA 3150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3478 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 7 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GMA 3150 or Radeon Vega 7, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.